Articles

This article considers a further decision on the Electronic Communications Code, in Schedule 3A to the Communications Act 2003. In University of London v Cornerstone Telecommunications Infrastructure Ltd, the Court of Appeal considered whether there was a right to survey to determine whether a prospective site was suitable for installation of electronic communications apparatus, and whether a right could be sought on an interim basis without additional rights being sought as well. The Court of Appeal held that a right to survey was embraced within the right under paragraph 3(d) of the Code, and that there was no need for rights to be sought on a final basis. Written by Oliver Radley-Gardner, who acted as junior counsel for the respondent.

• Oliver Radley-Gardner KC

Joe Ollech alongside Esther Stirling of Harrison Clark Rickerbys consider the recent case of Herefordshire DC v Bayliss and its impact on possession of tenanted land where development is intended. This article appears in Issue 98 of the ALA Bulletin.

• Joseph Ollech

Property Disputes analysis: The Court of Appeal endorsed the test proposed by the Upper Tribunal that an occupier for code purposes is ‘a question of fact rather than legal status; it means physical presence on and control of the land.’ Fern Horsfield-Schonhut, explains why the decision is of practical importance for operators seeking new code rights.

• Fern Schofield

CVAs after the Debenhams decision A note by Stephen Jourdan QC for the Property Litigation Association 31 October 2019

• Stephen Jourdan KC

Forfeiture: modern issues with an established remedy. Catherine taskis & Anthony tanney investigate.

• Catherine Taskis KC