Landmark’s property team had extensive experience of all aspects of the previous version of the Code, contained in the Telecommunications Act 1984 and is leading the way under the new Code, enacted in the Digital Economy Act 2017.
Highlights of Landmark’s experience include:
- Appearances in every case on the 1984 Code in England and Wales reported in the last 15 years, including the only Court of Appeal decision on the Code in that period
- Significant involvement of members of Landmark in the formulation of the new 2017 Code, including giving advice to the Law Commission on the state of the existing law, advising HM Government on its proposals for reform of the 1984 Code and assisting with the drafting of lobbying documents on behalf of operators and site providers
- Advising a number of new entrants into the electronic communications market, seeking to take advantage of the 2017 Code to become operators or the providers of telecommunications infrastructure networks
- Appearances in many of the most significant cases on the interpretation of the 2017 Code.
Landmark regularly acts for landowners, operators of electronic communications networks (both mobile telephone operators and fixed-line operators) and infrastructure providers. As well as instructions through solicitors, Landmark’s property team also accepts licensed access instructions from surveyors acting for either landowners or operators.
In addition to the Code and property law aspects of telecommunications, Landmark’s planning team also has extensive experience in dealing with issues surrounding the erection and retention of telecommunications masts.
Recent cases which have involved members of Landmark Chambers include:
- Cornerstone Telecommunications v. Keast
 UKUT 116 - addressing the nature of of ‘terms’ of a Code agreement under the 2017 Code
- EE Ltd v Islington LBC  UKUT 53 - addressing the approach to the statutory tests imposed by the Code in the context of the imposition of interim rights
- Cornerstone Telecommunications v University of the Arts London  UKUT 248 - addressing the balancing exercise undertaken within paragraph 21 of the Code, and the correct approach to disputed terms
- Arqiva Services Ltd v. AP Wireless (UK) Ltd  UKUT 195 - considering the approach to ‘subsisting agreements’ under the Code
- EE ltd v Morris  EW Misc 1
- Cornerstone Telecommunications v. Ashloch  UKUT 338,  EWCA Civ 2075 - considering the jurisdiction to impose Code agreements where there is an operator already present at the site
- EE Ltd v Chichester  UKUT 164 - considering the relevant tests where the site provider has an intention to redevelop the site
- Cornerstone Telecommunications v Gateway Properties Ltd  UKUT 188 - considering the consequences of the Supreme Court’s determination of the preliminary issues in Cornerstone v Compton Beauchamp and Ashloch  UKSC 18 upon the final resolution of the applications for new Code rights.