![[2025] UKUT 136 (LC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_lnJS4Uj.png){kind=logo}
The following cases are referred to in this decision
The following cases are referred to in this decision:
Cornerstone Telecommunications Infrastructure v Central Saint Giles GP Ltd [2019] UKUT 183 (LC)
Cornerstone Telecommunications Infrastructure v The University of London [2019] EWCA Civ 2124, [2020] 1 WLR 2124
EE Ltd v Hutchison 3G UK Ltd v HSBC Bank plc [2022] UKUT 174 (LC)
Goldman Sachs International v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2009] UKUT 290 (TCC)
Wallbrook Trustee v Fattal & Ors [2008] EWCA Civ 427
The issue
When a building owner is compelled by a tribunal to allow access for a survey to ascertain whether its building would be a suitable site for the installation of telecommunications apparatus, is the owner required to accept nominal consideration of £1, plus compensation for any damage or inconvenience caused, or should it be permitted to adduce expert evidence to support a claim for meaningful consideration assessed under paragraph 24 of the Electronic Communications Code? That is the question raised by this appeal.
At the hearing of the appeal both parties were represented by leading counsel, David Holland KC for the appellant and Oliver Radley-Gardner KC and James Tipler for the respondent. I am grateful to them for their submissions.