Originally Posted by
AlpineSkier
@Litebulbs
You seem to be sliding into using a standard BASSA tactic here : namely continuing to repeat a claim after it has demonstrably been proven wrong ( BASSA's 63 million pnds offered cost-savings being pre-eminenent ).
The imposition being discussed has been judged by the High Court to be non-contractual, so why do you apparently seek to ignore this by raising the red-herring of contract law when responding to AA SLF ?
It does not take away the fact that the courts had to rule on a contractual point. They ruled in favour of BA, however.