xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"

SCHEDULES

SCHEDULE 2U.K. The Telecommunications Code

Modifications etc. (not altering text)

Alteration of apparatus crossing a linear obstacleU.K.

14(1)Without prejudice to the following provisions of this code, the person with control of any relevant land may, on the ground that any telecommunication apparatus kept installed on, under or over that land for the purposes of the operator’s system interferes, or is likely to interfere, with—

(a)the carrying on of the railway, canal or tramway undertaking carried on by that person, or

(b)anything done or to be done for the purposes of that undertaking,

give notice to the operator requiring him to alter that apparatus.

(2)The operator shall within a reasonable time and to the reasonable satisfaction of the person giving the notice comply with a notice under sub-paragraph (1) above unless before the expiration of the period of 28 days beginning with the giving of the notice he gives a counter-notice to the person with control of the land in question specifying the respects in which he is not prepared to comply with the original notice.

(3)Where a counter-notice has been given under sub-paragraph (2) above the operator shall not be required to comply with the original notice but the person with control of the relevant land may apply to the court for an order requiring the alteration of any telecommunication apparatus to which the notice relates.

(4)The court shall not make an order under this paragraph unless it is satisfied that the order is necessary on one of the grounds mentioned in sub-paragraph (1) above and in determining whether to make such an order the court shall also have regard to all the circumstances and to the principle that no person should unreasonably be denied access to a telecommunication system.

(5)An order under this paragraph may take such form and be on such terms as the court thinks fit and may impose such conditions and may contain such directions to the operator or the person with control of the land in question as the court thinks necessary for resolving any difference between the operator and that person and for protecting their respective interests.

(6)In this paragraph references to relevant land and to the person with control of such land have the same meaning as in paragraph 12 above.