Henry Russell, an associate in the property litigation team at Clarke Willmott in Bristol, says a recent decision from the Upper Tribunal, a superior court of record, has shifted the goalposts for landowners with masts on their property, in terms of what qualifies as a valid reason for removal under the Electronic Communications Code.

 

The Vodafone v Icon Tower ruling makes it harder for landowners or infrastructure providers to remove telecoms masts without well-documented, imminent redevelopment plans. Demolition alone no longer counts as redevelopment under the ruling.

 

"It's hard to justify a situation where a landowner needs to demolish a building, say, for safety reasons, but can't do so just because there's telecoms equipment on the roof and no immediate rebuild planned," says Henry Russell, a specialist in property disputes and telecoms law.

 

"Some might suggest landowners rely on the 'prejudice' ground instead, which applies when continuing the agreement would seriously harm the landowner's interests.

 

"However, the tribunal has set the bar incredibly high, recognising the significant public benefit of telecoms services. As a result, proving sufficient prejudice is challenging and may not provide a straightforward path to removal."

 

In Vodafone v Icon Tower, the latter tried to use the "redevelopment" ground to force operators off existing masts onto a new one nearby. The tribunal rejected this, ruling redevelopment requires both demolition and replacement with something new.

 

"The tribunal's approach departs from established Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 principles, under which demolition alone can justify ending a tenancy. Here, 'redevelopment' now appears to require both demolition and rebuilding.

 

"A landowner needing to demolish for safety reasons, but with no firm rebuild plan, may find themselves stuck; the 'prejudice' ground offers little comfort, given the exceptionally high bar now set."

 

Henry Russell says telecoms disputes are rarely straightforward and urges landowners to seek specialist legal advice early on.

 

"Securing vacant possession can be one of the most time-consuming steps in the process, so it's important to start well ahead of any critical deadlines. Delays here can easily derail broader project timelines," he says.

 

"If you don't have a replacement structure planned, relying on the 'prejudice' ground may be your only option, but it requires strong evidence of serious harm, and even if removal isn't possible, claiming compensation is complex and not guaranteed.

 

"As a firm which acts exclusively for landowners against telecoms operators, we anticipate the tribunal's interpretation of the 'redevelopment' ground in this case will be subject to further legal challenge."

 

An appeal has been lodged in the Vodafone v Icon Tower case, with a hearing expected by March 2026. For more information, visit Clarke Willmott's expert telecommunications team.

 

Clarke Willmott is a national law firm with offices in Birmingham, Bristol, Cardiff, London, Manchester, Southampton, and Taunton.