Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
LORD JUSTICE DYSON LORD JUSTICE MAURICE KAY and LORD JUSTICE RIMER ____________________
Charles B�ar QC and Ben Hooper (instructed by Bird & Bird LLP) for the Appellant Michael Beloff QC and Gemma White (instructed by Legal Adviser to the CAA) for the Respondent Thomas Sharpe QC and Conall Patton (instructed by Herbert Smith LLP ) for the Interested Party Hearing dates : 25 & 26 November 2009 ____________________
"7. [The relevant statutory framework is] contained in the 1986 Act and the [1986 Regulations]. Gatwick is an airport designated by the Secretary of State under s.40(10) of the Act which means that the defendant must impose conditions which regulate the maximum amounts which may be levied by way of airport charges. In imposing any conditions (which extend to conditions as to accounts) the defendant is required by s.39(2) to act:-
S.40(3)��.requires the imposition of 'such conditions as the CAA considers appropriate" for regulating the maximum charges over successive 5 year periods. S.40(4) empowers the CAA to modify existing conditions for a succeeding 5 year period. S.40(5) provides:-
S.40(9) requires the CAA to make a reference to the Competition Commission (CC) before imposing or modifying any condition.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.