A recent decision in the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) has been decided in overwhelming favour of the Claimant operator, Cornerstone Telecommunications Infrastructure Limited ("Cornerstone").
Concerning Cornerstone's application for a new agreement under Part 5 (paragraph 33 and 34) of the Code, the decision orders the termination of the existing agreement and the completion of a new one between Cornerstone and the site providers, four individuals. Those site providers hold jointly the freehold title to the land on which the site is located – in rural Kent.
The Respondents were combative throughout and failed to engage in reasonable negotiations. They sought to impose their own form of agreement; dismissing Cornerstone's reasonable arguments (and the Tribunal's order) that its form of agreement should be the starting point in the claim and the negotiations. They alleged the site (in-situ for over twenty years) was incorrectly located and at various stages sought to argue that Cornerstone had no legal standing to seek a new agreement.
The Tribunal dismissed all of the Respondents' arguments, concluding that there was no evidence of breaches and/or to suggest the site was wrongly located (noting the Respondents had accepted rent for over twenty years). The Tribunal held that Cornerstone's agreement's terms were appropriate for the purposes of paragraph 23 of the Code, and that none of the Respondents' proposed amendments or additions were reasonable or required.
The decision also set the interim rent payable – the Respondents having conceded at a previous interlocutory hearing that the new rent should be £1,750, per the Vache Farm decision.
The Tribunal also dismissed the Respondents' notion (made only on the day of trial) that the agreed site payment of £1,750 per year for the first five years of the Code agreement should be increased to reflect the rise in the retail prices index (RPI) between September 26, 2024 (the earlier hearing date at which the site payment was determined) and the commencement date of the new agreement. The Tribunal was "not persuaded that this was the intention of the parties". The Tribunal further commented that if such an adjustment were to be made, the Respondents would logically have to accept RPI index-linking to reduce the interim site payment payable for the period between the date of Cornerstone's reference (August 10, 2023) and the commencement date of the new agreement. In light of these considerations, the Tribunal determined that the appropriate site payment for the first five years of the Code agreement (with a rent review at year five), and the appropriate interim site payment for the period from August 10, 2023, to the commencement date of the new agreement, should remain £1,750 per annum.
The Tribunal's decision helpfully – and not for the first time – demonstrates that the new Code is designed to facilitate the expansion of electronic communications networks in the public interest, granting operators broader rights and greater flexibility than previous legislation. Site providers cannot expect new agreements to simply replicate outdated terms, especially if those terms conflict with the Code's modern objectives. Put simply: the Code's public interest objectives and the operator's needs will be given appropriate weight by the Tribunal.
In this case, the Respondents' failure to engage constructively and their repeated non-compliance with Tribunal directions led to barring warnings and ultimately worked against them. A cooperative and compliant approach, even when disagreeing on terms, is crucial for a smooth and effective legal process – and is in the interests of justice.
The Tribunal found many of the Respondents' proposed amendments to be "unnecessarily complicated and/or burdensome and/or would require the Claimant to follow procedures that are disproportionate". There's a clear lesson in this: objections should focus on genuine risks and minimising loss or damage to the site provider, rather than attempts to "micromanage the Claimant's operation".
DAC Beachcroft acted for the operator, Cornerstone and instructed James Tipler of Falcon Chambers for trial.
