Cornerstone Telecommunications Infrastructure Limited v St Martins Property Investments Limited & Anor

Cornerstone Telecommunications Infrastructure Limited v St Martins Property Investments Limited & Anor

The Tribunal dismissed the claim against the freeholder, holding it need not be bound by interim rights for non-intrusive access. The Tribunal refused to grant the claimant the right to undertake intrusive investigative works at this stage, finding the respondent’s concerns justified and requiring the claimant to return with more detail if such works are needed. The Tribunal imposed an interim access agreement limited to non-intrusive MSVs, awarded the respondent full transactional legal costs (£11,000), and limited litigation costs to £12,500, emphasizing proportionality and the Code’s objective of economical dispute resolution.

Parties
Claimant: Cornerstone Telecommunications Infrastructure Limited; First Respondent: St Martins Property Investments Limited; Second Respondent: The Mayor and Commonalty and Citizens of the City of London
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 October 2021
Procedural Posture
Reference Under Schedule 3 A, Communications Act 2003 (electronic Communications Code) / Ruling on Interim Code Rights and Terms of Access Agreement
Outcome
Interim access agreement imposed; claim against freeholder dismissed; costs awarded.
Legal Topics
Electronic Communications Code, Interim Code Rights, Access Agreements, Compensation and Costs, Landlord and Tenant
Property Law Telecommunications Law Electronic Communications Code Interim Code Rights Access Agreements Compensation and Costs Landlord and Tenant

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cornerstone Telecommunications Infrastructure Limited

Claimant

St Martins Property Investments Limited

First Respondent

The Mayor and Commonalty and Citizens of the City of London

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Reference Under Schedule 3 A, Communications Act 2003 (electronic Communications Code) / Ruling on Interim Code Rights and Terms of Access Agreement

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the freeholder (second respondent) needs to be bound by interim rights for access under the Code
  2. 2 Whether the claimant should be granted the right to undertake destructive (intrusive) investigative works at the first hearing
  3. 3 What terms should be imposed in the interim access agreement, including compensation, supervision, and costs

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal dismissed the claim against the freeholder, holding it need not be bound by interim rights for non-intrusive access. The Tribunal refused to grant the claimant the right to undertake intrusive investigative works at this stage, finding the respondent’s concerns justified and requiring the claimant to return with more detail if such works are needed. The Tribunal imposed an interim access agreement limited to non-intrusive MSVs, awarded the respondent full transactional legal costs (£11,000), and limited litigation costs to £12,500, emphasizing proportionality and the Code’s objective of economical dispute resolution.

Court Disposition

Interim access agreement imposed; claim against freeholder dismissed; costs awarded.

Orders

  • Claim against the second respondent (freeholder) dismissed.
  • Interim access agreement imposed between claimant and first respondent, limited to non-intrusive MSVs for six months.