Vodafone Limited v Gencomp (No 7) Limited & Anor

Vodafone Limited v Gencomp (No 7) Limited & Anor

Where a concurrent lease exists, the concurrent lessee (here, APW) is the proper party to confer new Code rights on the operator under Part 4 of the Code. The Tribunal has jurisdiction to impose an agreement under paragraph 20 between the operator and the concurrent lessee, but not under paragraph 34 for conferral of rights. The freeholder (Gencomp) cannot confer rights it no longer possesses due to the concurrent lease. The Tribunal may order a tripartite agreement if appropriate.

Parties
Claimant: Vodafone Limited; Respondent: Gencomp (No.7) Limited; Respondent: A P Wireless II (UK) Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 August 2022
Procedural Posture
Reference Under Electronic Communications Code / Preliminary Issues Determination
Outcome
Preliminary issues determined; Tribunal has jurisdiction under paragraph 20 to impose agreement between Vodafone and APW; no jurisdiction under paragraph 34 to confer new rights; Tribunal may order tripartite agreement if necessary.
Legal Topics
Electronic Communications Code, Concurrent Leases, Renewal of Code Rights, Tribunal Jurisdiction
Land Law Telecommunications Law Electronic Communications Code Concurrent Leases Renewal of Code Rights Tribunal Jurisdiction

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vodafone Limited

Claimant

Gencomp (No.7) Limited

Respondent

A P Wireless II (UK) Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Reference Under Electronic Communications Code / Preliminary Issues Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Original Agreement was a 'subsisting agreement' under the transitional provisions
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction to impose Code rights or make orders under paragraphs 20 and 34 of the Code
  3. 3 Who is the proper party to confer new Code rights where a concurrent lease exists

Ratio Decidendi

Where a concurrent lease exists, the concurrent lessee (here, APW) is the proper party to confer new Code rights on the operator under Part 4 of the Code. The Tribunal has jurisdiction to impose an agreement under paragraph 20 between the operator and the concurrent lessee, but not under paragraph 34 for conferral of rights. The freeholder (Gencomp) cannot confer rights it no longer possesses due to the concurrent lease. The Tribunal may order a tripartite agreement if appropriate.

Court Disposition

Preliminary issues determined; Tribunal has jurisdiction under paragraph 20 to impose agreement between Vodafone and APW; no jurisdiction under paragraph 34 to confer new rights; Tribunal may order tripartite agreement if necessary.

Orders

  • Tribunal may impose agreement under paragraph 20 between Vodafone and APW conferring Code rights.
  • No order may be made under paragraph 34 for conferral of new agreement on Vodafone.