Automated Summary
Key Facts
Cornerstone Telecommunications Infrastructure Ltd (CTIL) and AP Wireless II (UK) Ltd (APW) disputed costs of references under the Electronic Communications Code. CTIL sought a new agreement to replace an existing tenancy but failed to achieve its objectives. The Tribunal dismissed the references and ordered CTIL to pay APW's costs, including those from the final reference. The case involved multiple procedural steps, a Supreme Court ruling on jurisdiction, and a Deed of Variation of the 1954 Act tenancy. The property in question is Windsor House and addresses on High Street in Kings Heath, Birmingham.
Issues
- The Tribunal addressed whether CTIL was entitled to seek new Code rights under Part 4 of the Electronic Communications Code while Vodafone's existing 1954 Act tenancy was in place. The Supreme Court previously ruled that CTIL could not renew or modify existing rights under the Code if rights under the 1954 Act were already in place but could seek new additional rights. The case also involved determining the costs of the references, including a 25% cost dispute, and whether CTIL's procedural actions (e.g., premature amendment of its case) justified additional cost liabilities. The Tribunal concluded that CTIL was not the successful party in the proceedings and ordered it to pay the costs to APW.
- The Tribunal considered the allocation of costs across three references, including the disputed 25% of APW's costs from the first reference. It evaluated whether CTIL's failure to achieve its original objectives and its procedural conduct (e.g., serving notices before the 28-day period expired) justified APW being awarded costs. The decision concluded that CTIL was not successful at any stage of the proceedings and must pay all costs to APW on the standard basis.
- The Tribunal examined whether CTIL's amendment to its statement of case on the same day as serving its final paragraph 20 notices violated the 28-day notice period under the Code. This procedural issue contributed to the necessity of the third reference, and the Tribunal determined that the premature amendment led to avoidable costs, which CTIL was ordered to pay to APW.
Holdings
- CTIL's premature amendment of its statement of case led to unnecessary costs, which were also assigned to CTIL.
- APW was deemed the successful party in the proceedings, entitled to recover costs from CTIL.
- The Tribunal dismissed both references and ruled that CTIL is liable for the costs incurred in the proceedings.
Remedies
- The Tribunal ordered that the costs of the references be paid by Cornerstone Telecommunications Infrastructure Ltd (CTIL) to AP Wireless II (UK) Ltd (APW), assessed on the standard basis if unagreed.
- The Tribunal dismissed both references, concluding that there was no need for further orders as the parties had resolved their dispute through a Deed of Variation of the existing 1954 Act tenancy.
Legal Principles
The Tribunal adhered to the general principle that the unsuccessful party in litigation is typically liable for the costs of the successful party. This included evaluating the parties' conduct, settlement terms, and the proportionality of costs. CTIL was deemed unsuccessful overall, leading to an order for it to pay APW's costs for all references except those under Supreme Court review.
Precedent Name
Cornerstone Telecommunications Infrastructure Ltd v Compton Beauchamp Estates Ltd
Cited Statute
- Communications Act 2003
- Electronic Communications Code
- Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007
Judge Name
Martin Rodger KC
Passage Text
- I, therefore, do not accept Mr McGhee's suggestion that CTIL is the successful party. There is no doubt in my mind that... APW is the successful party in the proceedings as a whole.
- It is not necessary for me to form any concluded view on the nice points on whether the rights sought are or are not Code rights... the Tribunal could perhaps have pruned the agreements... but that was not what it was being asked to do.
- The costs will be assessed on the standard basis if they cannot be agreed.