BAILII [Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]

England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Decisions


You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Decisions >> London Buses Services Ltd v Tramtrack Croydon Ltd [2006] EWCA Civ 1832 (19 December 2006)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2006/1832.html
Cite as: [2006] EWCA Civ 1832

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]


Neutral Citation Number: [2006] EWCA Civ 1832
A3/2006/0748

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM THE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
(MR JUSTICE TOMLINSON)

Royal Courts of Justice
Strand
London, WC2
19 December 2006

B e f o r e :

LORD JUSTICE SEDLEY
LORD JUSTICE LONGMORE
LORD JUSTICE HALLETT

____________________

LONDON BUSES SERVICES LTD CLAIMANT/APPELLANT
- v -
TRAMTRACK CROYDON LTD DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT

____________________

(DAR Transcript of
WordWave International Limited
A Merrill Communications Company
190 Fleet Street, London EC4A 2AG
Tel No: 020 7404 1400 Fax No: 020 7831 8838
Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)

____________________

MR S MALES QC & MR T RAPHAEL (instructed by Field Fisher Waterhouse) appeared on behalf of the Appellant.
MR R WILMOT QC & MR S WILKEN (instructed by Ashurst) appeared on behalf of the Respondent.

____________________

HTML VERSION OF JUDGMENT
____________________

Crown Copyright ©

  1. LORD JUSTICE LONGMORE: For the reasons given in the judgment that I now hand down, this appeal will be dismissed save in one respect, and I will read the order of the court which is that: 1) the appeal is dismissed save as set out in paragraph 2 below; 2) the following passages of the judge's judgment be set aside: those parts of the judge's judgment which decide that measures intended to bring about an increase in passenger carrying capacity would involve a change to or a change outside the service parameters set out in section 9 of part 4 of the specification, namely i) paragraph 34 last sentence and ii) the clarification of this issue in the judge's supplementary judgment given on 17 March 2006; 3) permission for appeal to the House of Lords is refused; and 4) the appellants to pay three-quarters of the respondent's costs of the appeal including, for the avoidance of doubt, those costs incurred in responding to the appellant's notice of appeal and first skeleton argument
  2. The reason for our order for costs is that we regard the appellant's success as set out in paragraph 2 of this order as a very limited success, the point raised being at this stage hypothetical and not appropriate for final decision.
  3. That is the order of the court which we have made after consideration of the submissions presented to us.
  4. Order: Appeal dismissed.


BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2006/1832.html