Landmark Chambers

Home > Our people > Barristers > Nicholas Taggart

Nicholas Taggart

Nicholas Taggart


Print all

Telecommunications & Wayleaves

Very similar issues arise in respect of the rights given to other infrastructure providers, such as gas, electricity and water companies. Nic also has experience in advising landowners whose land is adversely affected by the installation or retention of pylons, power lines, pipes, sewers and mains water supply.

By its nature, much of this work is conducted through the County Courts or through arbitration. However, Nic has appeared in two of the small number of reported cases:

  • The Bridgewater Canal Co.Ltd. v. GEO Networks Ltd  [2011] 1 WLR 1487; [2011] RVR 13 (CA), on appeal from [2010] 1 WLR 2576; [2010] RVR 171. The Court of Appeal found that, in respect of the special regime applicable to “linear obstacles” (in this case, the Bridgewater Canal) the telecommunications operator did not have to pay the canal operator consideration for the right to cross the linear obstacle with communications apparatus and then retain it thereafter. All that the telecommunications operator had to pay was compensation for any loss actually caused by the process of installing the line.

  • Crest Nicholson (Operations) Ltd. v. Arqiva Services Ltd. and Others, Estates Gazette 24th July 2015 PP 2015/142.  This County Court decision resolved the much-debated question of whether a notice can be served under paragraph 21 of the Code at a time when a break notice has been served, but has not yet taken effect.  Nic acted for two of the successful operators who got the claim based on such a notice struck out.