EE Limited and Hutchinson 3G UK Limited v London Underground Limited

The security risks identified by London Underground are too remote and theoretical to amount to prejudice incapable of compensation by money; limited, supervised access for MSV can be imposed with appropriate conditions; claimants have made out a good arguable case that paragraph 21 conditions are met.

Parties: Claimant: EE Limited; Claimant: Hutchison 3G UK Limited; Respondent: London Underground Limited
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 01 June 2021
Procedural Posture: Reference Under Electronic Communications Code / Interim Rights Application, First Hearing
Outcome: interim rights for access imposed
Legal Topics: Interim Code Rights, Access to Critical National Infrastructure, Security Concerns, Public Interest Balancing

Property Law Telecommunications Law Interim Code Rights Access to Critical National Infrastructure Security Concerns Public Interest Balancing

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2

Parties

EE Limited

Claimant

Hutchison 3G UK Limited

Claimant

London Underground Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Reference Under Electronic Communications Code / Interim Rights Application, First Hearing

Legal Issues

1 Whether security concerns are sufficient to demonstrate prejudice to prospective site provider under paragraph 21 of the Code
2 Whether interim rights for access to assess suitability for telecommunications apparatus should be imposed

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

interim rights for access imposed

Orders

London Underground to identify terms for agreement to meet security requirements; claimants to respond.
No order for costs; claimants may apply for costs after outcome of any paragraph 20 application.