Buckinghamshire Council v FCC Buckinghamshire Ltd [2025] EWCA Civ 921 (18 July 2025)

Buckinghamshire Council v FCC Buckinghamshire Ltd [2025] EWCA Civ 921 (18 July 2025)

The Court held that only costs incurred specifically and solely in relation to the particular income-generating activity are deductible from Third Party Income, rejecting FCCB's broader causal connection argument. The Luton unitary charge proportionate to waste sent to Greatmoor constitutes Third Party Income. The burden to demonstrate deductibility of costs rests with FCCB due to its sole knowledge of relevant expenses. Haulage costs incurred outside the Facilities are deductible, as proviso (c) in the Project Agreement does not bar such deductions.

Citation
[2025] EWCA Civ 921
Parties
Claimant/respondent/appellant: Buckinghamshire Council; Defendant/appellant/respondent: FCC Buckinghamshire Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 July 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeals dismissed; High Court judgment largely upheld.
Legal Topics
Interpretation of Contract Terms, Deductibility of Costs, Income Sharing Mechanisms, Burden of Proof, Waste Management Agreements
Contract Law Public Procurement Commercial Law Interpretation of Contract Terms Deductibility of Costs Income Sharing Mechanisms Burden of Proof Waste Management Agreements

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Buckinghamshire Council

Claimant/respondent/appellant

FCC Buckinghamshire Limited

Defendant/appellant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether FCCB was entitled to deduct various costs from Third Party Income before sharing with the Council
  2. 2 Whether income FCCB received from Luton Borough Council was Third Party Income
  3. 3 Proper construction of 'costs directly incurred' and related provisos in the Project Agreement

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that only costs incurred specifically and solely in relation to the particular income-generating activity are deductible from Third Party Income, rejecting FCCB's broader causal connection argument. The Luton unitary charge proportionate to waste sent to Greatmoor constitutes Third Party Income. The burden to demonstrate deductibility of costs rests with FCCB due to its sole knowledge of relevant expenses. Haulage costs incurred outside the Facilities are deductible, as proviso (c) in the Project Agreement does not bar such deductions.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed; High Court judgment largely upheld.

Orders

  • FCCB's appeal on deductibility of costs dismissed.
  • FCCB's appeal regarding Luton unitary charge dismissed.