Communications code should be rewritten, Law Commission says

The Law Commission has called for the electronic communications code, which regulates the legal relationship between landowners and network providers, to be rewritten.

However, launching a consultation on the code, the commission said the aim was for the “revision of a well-established system of regulation, not for a new regime, not for major change.”

Professor Elizabeth Cooke, the law commissioner in charge of the project, said the existing code was “complex, confusing and out of date”.

She went on: “Landowners and network providers have told us that it doesn’t work for them, and it no longer serves the public who, today, quite reasonably expect to have access to modern communication technologies.

“The best, most effective elements of the code encourage agreement between parties but its flaws leave landowners and network providers negotiating in the dark.”

In the executive summary to its report, the commission said the new code, like the existing one, must contain protections for landowners and network operators, while recognising the public interest in the provision of services.

“To date, the vast majority of arrangements between operators and landowners have been reached by agreement and without compulsion, and landowners have been able to demand a market price for the right to use their land,” the commission said.

“The revised code will not affect deals already struck, and we anticipate that arrangements made against the background of the revised code will continue to be made by agreement, although there will continue to be a basis for the imposition of rights where necessary and appropriate.”

Under the commission’s plans, landowners would continue to be paid a market price for the right to use land, but the definition of market value should be familiar to valuers and conform to their standards.

The legal test for the compulsory siting of equipment should be “clear and compatible with human rights” and where an agreement with a landowner has ended, they should have “clear rights to remove equipment”.

Disputes involving the code, which are currently dealt with by the county courts, should be heard instead by the Lands Chamber of the Upper Tribunal.

The commission recommended provisions similar to Part 2 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 for situations where agreements have ended, so rights and obligations continue until brought to an end by the landowner giving notice within 18 months.