Biggin Hill Airport Ltd v Bromley London Borough Council: CA 11 Jul 2001

A lease of an airport included a restriction to limit use to ‘business aviation’. The landlord argued that this had a special meaning in the industry so as to exclude use by chartered and scheduled services. The judge had been correct to say that no such special meaning existed, but had been wrong to interpret that phrase without looking to the factual background. Applying those facts, the use was to be interpreted so as to allow use of aircraft, including chartered aircraft, for business purposes, as within the context of the business of the aircraft owner or charterer for business purposes, but so as to exclude offering transport to members of the public for reward save in an incidental way. The phrase ‘other uses related to an airport or related to aviation’ did not permit other flying activities.


Pill LJ, Arden J, Dyson LJ


Times 13-Aug-2001, Gazette 31-Aug-2001, [2001] EWCA Civ 1089




England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant, Transport, Contract

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.159480