header-logo header-logo

10 January 2008 / Alistair Craig
Issue: 7304 / Categories: Features , Public , Competition , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Mast Rights

Alistair Craig considers the compulsory powers to acquire and retain mobile phone masts

 

Many owners who have entered licence agreements or contracted out tenancies for the siting of mobile phone masts and electronic communications equipment now find themselves unable to secure their removal by virtue of operators’ compulsory powers to acquire and retain sites.

 

Instead of providing a national transmission infrastructure, successive administrations encouraged a market-led approach for the rollout of mobile phone and electronic communication networks. By reference only to the speed of roll-out and the extent of networks, the market-led policy could be judged as remarkably successful. However, a different judgment could be reached when one considers the unnecessary duplication of costs, the proliferation of sites and apparatus, and the attendant concerns about the consequences for health, property values and aesthetics. It has been estimated that if a national grid network had been adopted, 80% of existing masts could be removed.

 

COMPULSORY PURCHASE

To facilitate the roll-out of networks, legislation enshrined the principle that

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Browne Jacobson—Vicky Tomlinson

Browne Jacobson—Vicky Tomlinson

Browne Jacobson appoints Vicky Tomlinson as Head of Independent Health and Care

DWF—five appointments

DWF—five appointments

DWF further strengthens major injury and casualty offering with new partner and four directors from DAC Beachcroft

Switalskis—Laura Ornsby

Switalskis—Laura Ornsby

Switalskis strengthens Grimsby child care team

NEWS
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’

Safety fears do not automatically justify shutting an interested person out of a statutory will application

back-to-top-scroll