TEL AVIV- Ryanair (FR) has dropped Tel Aviv (TLV) from its destination map after confirming it will not operate flights to Israel during the 2025 to 2026 winter season. The change appears without a formal statement on whether services might return.
The removal goes beyond a temporary suspension and signals deeper uncertainty around the airline’s long-term plans in the Israeli market. Passengers searching the site no longer see Tel Aviv listed among active or paused destinations.
Photo: PixaBay
Tel Aviv Removed from Ryanair Map
Maariv reported that Tel Aviv was fully removed rather than marked as suspended, reinforcing Ryanair’s earlier decision to freeze all operations until at least summer 2026.
The update has intensified concerns within Israel’s aviation sector that the carrier may have no concrete timeline for resuming service.
The airline has not issued any new communication regarding a permanent withdrawal. Its last statements only addressed the winter suspension, leaving industry observers to interpret the latest website update as a stronger signal of retreat, Jerusalem Post reported.
Photo: N i c o_ Flickr
Slot Allocation and Regulatory Challenges
Ryanair previously cited two operational barriers. The first is the absence of approved slots for the 2026 summer season at Ben Gurion Airport.
The second is uncertainty surrounding the future of Terminal 1, the facility used for low-cost operations. Without clarity on these points, the airline argued it could not plan medium-term schedules.
The suspension announced for winter 2025 to 2026 involved the cancellation of roughly 22 direct routes and about one million planned seats.
This cut removed a significant portion of the low-cost capacity serving several European destinations from Tel Aviv and increased pressure on remaining carriers.
Photo: By kitmasterbloke – https://www.flickr.com/photos/58415659@N00/51752028899/, CC BY 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=114422105
Escalating Tension With Aviation Authorities
The latest development follows months of rising friction between Ryanair and Israeli regulators. In late September, local reports detailed the airline’s claim that slot delays and the closure of Terminal 1 made its Israel program unworkable.
Ben Gurion Airport rejected those claims and said the disruptions stemmed from decisions made by the airline itself.
At that time, Ryanair confirmed the cancellation of 22 winter routes and said capacity would be redirected to other markets. This signaled a decline in Israel’s strategic importance for the carrier and foreshadowed the current removal of Tel Aviv from the destination map.
Uncertainty Around a Possible Return
Ryanair had already warned that it might not return to Israel, urging authorities to resolve regulatory and airport infrastructure issues.
Earlier in the year, it attributed cancellations to security conditions and operational challenges faced by foreign airlines serving Ben Gurion.
Despite these concerns, other international carriers have resumed service after earlier suspensions, with at least 14 airlines restoring operations this year. Even so, Ryanair’s full removal of Tel Aviv, coupled with the earlier cancellation of one million seats, underscores the scale of its retreat from the Israeli market.
Aer Lingus & American Airlines Group in Dublin airport, 20/05/2017. Aeroin.net
Ryanair Court Dispute with Irish Authorities
Ryanair has failed to secure High Court orders for the return of documents seized during a search at its Dublin Airport (DUB) office. Italian regulators used these documents in a provisional finding that the airline engaged in anticompetitive conduct.
The carrier faces potential exposure to significant penalties in Italy and the possible need to rethink long-standing parts of its operating model if the claims are upheld.
The court dispute and its wider implications
The case stems from an investigation launched in Italy after a complaint that Ryanair’s online sales system restricts travel agencies from purchasing the lowest fare tickets directly through its website.
Agencies are instead directed to global distribution systems, which Italian regulators say may distort competition and reflect an abuse of market dominance.
Irish officials from the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission searched Ryanair’s Dublin Airport facilities in March 2024 with assistance from Italy’s competition watchdog, AGCM. They seized 222 documents, which were then transferred to Italy and later formed a core part of AGCM’s provisional findings against the airline.
Ryanair argued in the High Court that the documents were improperly obtained and should be returned to the CCPC until its legal challenge to the search warrant is resolved.
The airline maintains that the warrant was issued on incomplete information and has pursued parallel litigation in Ireland and Italy to challenge both the search and the use of the documents.
Mr Justice Max Barrett refused to order their return. He held that Ryanair’s actions amounted to a collateral challenge to an ongoing Italian investigation and that any concerns about AGCM’s conduct must be addressed through Italy’s legal avenues.
The court also declined to refer the matter to the Court of Justice of the EU, finding no EU law clarification was required to rule on the application.
Photo: By Steve Knight – https://www.flickr.com/photos/kitmasterbloke/51341704771/, CC BY 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=113415745
How the Italian investigation is progressing
AGCM issued a notice of investigative findings last month, stating a provisional view that Ryanair engaged in anticompetitive practices in Italy. This assessment relies heavily on the seized documents. The preliminary phase of the investigation is due to close this month, with a final decision expected by December 31, 2025.
Ryanair has said it could face fines of up to ten percent of its global turnover if the conduct is ultimately proven. It warned that an adverse ruling could force major adjustments to its business model in Italy, followed by potential reinstatement if an appeal later succeeds.
Why the High Court declined to intervene
The judgment noted that Ryanair did not take timely steps in Italy to challenge AGCM’s actions and that the Irish court could not compensate for those omissions. The court stated it would not impose obligations on an Irish statutory body regarding material already in the hands of a foreign regulator.
The decision clears the way for the Italian process to continue without interruption. Ryanair continues to deny all allegations.
Stay tuned with us. Further, follow us on social media for the latest updates.
Join us on Telegram Group for the Latest Aviation Updates. Subsequently, follow us on Google News