![Case Nos: CA-2024-002136 - [2025] EWCA Civ 921](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_Sjvxvlx.png){kind=logo}
Conclusions
Overall conclusions
I would dismiss FCCB’s appeal, but I would accede to ground 3 of the Council’s appeal.
Lord Justice Jeremy Baker:
I agree.
Sir Launcelot Henderson:
I also agree.
- Heading
- Lord Justice Newey
- Some of the contractual terms
- W TPI = TPW R x 0.75
- GTPW TPI = the Guaranteed Third Party Waste Third Party Income. …”
- Contracts with third parties The Luton contract
- The Hertfordshire contracts
- The North London Waste Authority contracts
- O’Farrell J’s judgment
- The present proceedings
- The appeals
- Deductible costs “directly incurred”
- The Judgment
- FCCB’s case
- Discussion
- Proviso (a)
- The Judgment
- The parties’ positions
- Discussion
- Burden of proof
- Overall conclusion
- The Luton unitary charge
- The Judgment
- FCCB’s case
- Discussion
- Haulage costs
- Proviso (c)
- The Judge’s reasoning
- The parties’ positions
- Conclusions
- Conclusions