Discusses whether alterations to the taxiways and aprons constitute grounds for compensation under the Land Compensation Act 1973 s9(6)(b). B claimed that the value of their properties had been diminished by increased aircraft noise resulting from alterations made at the S's airport. S claimed and the LT ruled that alterations to the taxiways and aprons did not come within the Land Compensation Act 1973 s9(6)(b). B submitted that s9(6)(b) of the Act was satisfied 1) where, although the aircraft throughput was not projected to increase as a result of the alterations, there was a projected increase in aircraft types; 2) because the sole or primary intention of S's parent company was to increase the volume of larger, commercial passenger aircraft using the airport and that the compensating reduction in the number of other aircraft categories using the airport was irrelevant. "Held": the natural meaning in context of the words 'a greater number of aircraft' in s9(6)(b) of the Act was that the 'greater number' was to be assessed with reference to the airport's potential throughput; a scheme, which gave a right to compensation for an increase in aircraft types would be uncertain in effect and not eliminate anomalies. Appeal dismissed.