Session 2016-17
Internet Publications
Other Bills before Parliament


 
 

1

 

House of Commons

 
 

Thursday 20 October 2016

 

Public Bill Committee Proceedings

 

Digital Economy Bill


 

[Fifth and Sixth Sittings]


 

Glossary

 

This document shows the fate of each clause, schedule, amendment and new clause.

 

The following terms are used:

 

Agreed to: agreed without a vote.

 

Agreed to on division: agreed following a vote.

 

Negatived: rejected without a vote.

 

Negatived on division: rejected following a vote.

 

Not called: debated in a group of amendments, but not put to a decision.

 

Not moved: not debated or put to a decision.

 

Withdrawn after debate: moved and debated but then withdrawn, so not put to a decision.

 

Not selected: not chosen for debate by the Chair.

 

 


 

Matt Hancock

 

That the Order of the Committee of 11 October be amended as follows—

 

(1) In paragraph (1), after sub-paragraph (f) insert—

 


 

      “(g) at 9.25 am on Tuesday 1 November;”.

 


 

  (2) In paragraph (4), for “5.00 pm on Thursday 27 October” substitute “11.25 am on

 

     Tuesday 1 November”.

 

 

Agreed to

 



 
 

Public Bill Committee Proceedings: 20 October 2016        

2

 

Digital Economy Bill, continued

 
 

Calum Kerr

 

Negatived on division  60

 

Clause  3,  page  2,  line  35,  at end insert—

 

“(db)    

require a communications provider to allow an end-user to terminate a

 

contract on repeatedly failing to meet a specific standard or obligation;”

 

Louise Haigh

 

Kevin Brennan

 

Not called  84

 

Clause  3,  page  2,  line  35,  after “obligation”, add “within reasonable timescales”

 

insert”

 

Clause Agreed to.

 

Clause 4 Agreed to.

 


 

Matt Hancock

 

Agreed to  12

 

Schedule  1,  page  82,  line  29,  leave out “and keep”

 

Matt Hancock

 

Agreed to  13

 

Schedule  1,  page  82,  line  30,  at end insert—

 

“(aa)    

to keep installed electronic communications apparatus which is on,

 

under or over the land,”

 

Matt Hancock

 

Agreed to  14

 

Schedule  1,  page  83,  line  2,  leave out from “installation” to end of line 4 and insert

 

“of electronic communications apparatus on, under or over the land or elsewhere;

 

(ca)    

to carry out any works on the land for or in connection with the

 

maintenance, adjustment, alteration, repair, upgrading or operation of

 

electronic communications apparatus which is on, under or over the

 

land or elsewhere,”

 

Matt Hancock

 

Agreed to  15

 

Schedule  1,  page  86,  line  26,  leave out “The reference in sub-paragraph (2)” and

 

insert “A reference in this code”

 

Matt Hancock

 

Agreed to  16

 

Schedule  1,  page  95,  line  2,  after “36” insert “or as mentioned in paragraph

 

38A(1)”

 

Matt Hancock

 

Agreed to  17

 

Schedule  1,  page  95,  line  10,  leave out “or” and insert “and”


 
 

Public Bill Committee Proceedings: 20 October 2016        

3

 

Digital Economy Bill, continued

 
 

Matt Hancock

 

Agreed to  18

 

Schedule  1,  page  102,  line  1,  leave out “with an interest in land”

 

Matt Hancock

 

Agreed to  19

 

Schedule  1,  page  102,  line  3,  at end insert “or the restoration of land,”

 

Matt Hancock

 

Agreed to  20

 

Schedule  1,  page  102,  line  6,  after “removal” insert “of apparatus or restoration of

 

land”

 

Matt Hancock

 

Agreed to  21

 

Schedule  1,  page  102,  line  14,  after “never” insert “since the coming into force of

 

this code”

 

Matt Hancock

 

Agreed to  22

 

Schedule  1,  page  102,  line  24,  at end insert “, or

 

( )    

where the right was granted by a lease to which Part 5 of this code does

 

not apply.”

 

Matt Hancock

 

Agreed to  23

 

Schedule  1,  page  103,  line  17,  at end insert—

 

    “( )  

This paragraph does not affect rights to require the removal of apparatus under

 

another enactment (see paragraph 38A).”

 

Matt Hancock

 

Agreed to  24

 

Schedule  1,  page  103,  line  17,  at end insert—

 

“When does a landowner or occupier of neighbouring land have the right to require

 

removal of electronic communications apparatus?

 

36A(1)  

A landowner or occupier of any land (“neighbouring land”) has the right to

 

require the removal of electronic communications apparatus on, under or over

 

other land if both of the following conditions are met.

 

      (2)  

The first condition is that the exercise by an operator in relation to the

 

apparatus of a right mentioned in paragraph 13(1) interferes with or obstructs

 

a means of access to or from the neighbouring land.

 

      (3)  

The second condition is that the landowner or occupier of the neighbouring

 

land is not bound by a code right within paragraph 3(f) entitling an operator to

 

cause the interference or obstruction.

 

      (4)  

A landowner of neighbouring land who is not the occupier of the land does not

 

meet the second condition if—

 

(a)    

the land is occupied by a person who—

 

(i)    

conferred a code right (which is in force) entitling an operator

 

to cause the interference or obstruction, or

 

(ii)    

is otherwise bound by such a right, and


 
 

Public Bill Committee Proceedings: 20 October 2016        

4

 

Digital Economy Bill, continued

 
 

(b)    

that code right was not conferred in breach of a covenant enforceable

 

by the landowner.

 

      (5)  

In the application of sub-paragraph (4)(b) to Scotland the reference to a

 

covenant enforceable by the landowner is to be read as a reference to a

 

contractual term which is so enforceable.”

 

Matt Hancock

 

Agreed to  25

 

Schedule  1,  page  103,  line  27,  at end insert—

 

  “(1A)  

A landowner or occupier of neighbouring land may by notice require an

 

operator to disclose whether—

 

(a)    

the operator owns electronic communications apparatus on, under or

 

over land that forms (or, but for the apparatus, would form) a means

 

of access to the neighbouring land, or uses such apparatus for the

 

purposes of the operator’s network, or

 

(b)    

the operator has the benefit of a code right entitling the operator to

 

keep electronic communications apparatus on, under or over land that

 

forms (or, but for the apparatus, would form) a means of access to the

 

neighbouring land.”

 

Matt Hancock

 

Agreed to  26

 

Schedule  1,  page  103,  line  33,  after “(1)” insert “or (1A)”

 

Matt Hancock

 

Agreed to  27

 

Schedule  1,  page  103,  line  34,  after “landowner” insert “or occupier”

 

Matt Hancock

 

Agreed to  28

 

Schedule  1,  page  103,  line  37,  after “landowner” insert “or occupier”

 

Matt Hancock

 

Agreed to  29

 

Schedule  1,  page  103,  line  38,  after “landowner” insert “or occupier”

 

Matt Hancock

 

Agreed to  30

 

Schedule  1,  page  103,  line  47,  after “landowner” insert “or occupier”

 

Matt Hancock

 

Agreed to  31

 

Schedule  1,  page  104,  line  2,  leave out from beginning to “requiring” in line 9 and

 

insert—

 

    “(1)  

The right of a landowner or occupier to require the removal of electronic

 

communications apparatus on, under or over land, under paragraph 36 or 36A,

 

is exercisable only in accordance with this paragraph.

 

      (2)  

The landowner or occupier may give a notice to the operator whose apparatus

 

it is”

 

Matt Hancock

 

Agreed to  32

 

Schedule  1,  page  104,  line  23,  after “landowner” insert “or occupier”


 
 

Public Bill Committee Proceedings: 20 October 2016        

5

 

Digital Economy Bill, continued

 
 

Matt Hancock

 

Agreed to  33

 

Schedule  1,  page  104,  line  33,  after “landowner” insert “or occupier”

 

Matt Hancock

 

Agreed to  34

 

Schedule  1,  page  104,  line  40,  after “landowner” insert “or occupier”

 

Matt Hancock

 

Agreed to  35

 

Schedule  1,  page  104,  line  41,  after “landowner” insert “or occupier”

 

Matt Hancock

 

Agreed to  36

 

Schedule  1,  page  104,  line  42,  at end insert—

 

    “( )  

On an application under sub-paragraph (6) or (7) the court may not make an

 

order in relation to apparatus if an application under paragraph 19(3) has been

 

made in relation to the apparatus and has not been determined.”

 

Matt Hancock

 

Agreed to  37

 

Schedule  1,  page  104,  line  42,  at end insert—

 

“How are other rights to require removal of apparatus enforced?

 

38A(1)  

The right of a person (a “third party”) under an enactment other than this code,

 

or otherwise than under an enactment, to require the removal of electronic

 

communications apparatus on, under or over land is exercisable only in

 

accordance with this paragraph.

 

      (2)  

The third party may give a notice to the operator whose apparatus it is,

 

requiring the operator—

 

(a)    

to remove the apparatus, and

 

(b)    

to restore the land to its condition before the apparatus was placed on,

 

under or over the land.

 

      (3)  

The notice must—

 

(a)    

comply with paragraph 85 (notices given by persons other than

 

operators), and

 

(b)    

specify the period within which the operator must complete the works.

 

      (4)  

The period specified under sub-paragraph (3) must be a reasonable one.

 

      (5)  

Within the period of 28 days beginning with the day on which notice under

 

sub-paragraph (2) is given, the operator may give the third party notice

 

(“counter-notice”)—

 

(a)    

stating that the third party is not entitled to require the removal of the

 

apparatus, or

 

(b)    

specifying the steps which the operator proposes to take for the

 

purpose of securing a right as against the third party to keep the

 

apparatus on the land.

 

      (6)  

If the operator does not give counter-notice within that period, the third party

 

is entitled to enforce the removal of the apparatus.

 

      (7)  

If the operator gives the third party counter-notice within that period, the third

 

party may enforce the removal of the apparatus only in pursuance of an order

 

of the court that the third party is entitled to enforce the removal of the

 

apparatus.


 
 

Public Bill Committee Proceedings: 20 October 2016        

6

 

Digital Economy Bill, continued

 
 

      (8)  

If the counter-notice specifies steps under paragraph (5)(b), the court may

 

make an order under sub-paragraph (7) only if it is satisfied—

 

(a)    

that the operator is not intending to take those steps or is being

 

unreasonably dilatory in taking them; or

 

(b)    

that taking those steps has not secured, or will not secure, for the

 

operator as against the third party any right to keep the apparatus

 

installed on, under or over the land or to re-install it if it is removed.

 

      (9)  

Where the third party is entitled to enforce the removal of the apparatus, under

 

sub-paragraph (6) or under an order under sub-paragraph (7), the third party

 

may make an application to the court for—

 

(a)    

an order under paragraph 39(1) (order requiring operator to remove

 

apparatus etc), or

 

(b)    

an order under paragraph 39(2) (order enabling third party to sell

 

apparatus etc).

 

    (10)  

If the court makes an order under paragraph 39(1), but the operator does not

 

comply with the agreement imposed on the operator and the third party by

 

virtue of paragraph 39(5), the third party may make an application to the court

 

for an order under paragraph 39(2).

 

    (11)  

An order made on an application under this paragraph need not include

 

provision within paragraph 39(1)(b) or (2)(d) unless the court thinks it

 

appropriate.

 

    (12)  

Sub-paragraph (9) is without prejudice to any other method available to the

 

third party for enforcing the removal of the apparatus.

 

How does paragraph 38A apply if a person is entitled to require apparatus to be altered

 

in consequence of street works?

 

38B(1)  

This paragraph applies where the third party’s right in relation to which

 

paragraph 38A applies is a right to require the alteration of the apparatus in

 

consequence of the stopping up, closure, change or diversion of a street or road

 

or the extinguishment or alteration of a public right of way.

 

      (2)  

The removal of the apparatus in pursuance of paragraph 38A constitutes

 

compliance with a requirement to make any other alteration.

 

      (3)  

A counter-notice under paragraph 38A(5) may state (in addition to, or instead

 

of, any of the matters mentioned in paragraph 38A(5)(b)) that the operator

 

requires the third party to reimburse the operator in respect of any expenses

 

incurred by the operator in or in connection with the making of any alteration

 

in compliance with the requirements of the third party.

 

      (4)  

An order made under paragraph 38A on an application by the third party in

 

respect of a counter-notice containing a statement under sub-paragraph (3)

 

must, unless the court otherwise thinks fit, require the third party to reimburse

 

the operator in respect of the expenses referred to in the statement.

 

      (5)  

Paragraph 39(2)(b) to (e) do not apply.

 

      (6)  

In this paragraph—

 

“road” means a road in Scotland;

 

“street” means a street in England and Wales or Northern Ireland.”


 
 

Public Bill Committee Proceedings: 20 October 2016        

7

 

Digital Economy Bill, continued

 
 

Matt Hancock

 

Agreed to  38

 

Schedule  1,  page  104,  line  42,  at end insert—

 

“When can a separate application for restoration of land be made?

 

38C(1)  

This paragraph applies if—

 

(a)    

the condition of the land has been affected by the exercise of a code

 

right, and

 

(b)    

restoration of the land to its condition before the code right was

 

exercised does not involve the removal of electronic communications

 

apparatus from any land.

 

      (2)  

The occupier of the land, the owner of the freehold estate in the land or the

 

lessee of the land (“the relevant person”) has the right to require the operator

 

to restore the land if the relevant person is not for the time being bound by the

 

code right.

 

            

This is subject to sub-paragraph (3).

 

      (3)  

The relevant person does not have that right if—

 

(a)    

the land is occupied by a person who—

 

(i)    

conferred a code right (which is in force) entitling the operator

 

to affect the condition of the land in the same way as the right

 

mentioned in sub-paragraph (1), or

 

(ii)    

is otherwise bound by such a right, and

 

(b)    

that code right was not conferred in breach of a covenant enforceable

 

by the relevant person.

 

      (4)  

In the application of sub-paragraph (3)(b) to Scotland the reference to a

 

covenant enforceable by the relevant person is to be read as a reference to a

 

contractual term which is so enforceable.

 

      (5)  

A person who has the right conferred by this paragraph may give a notice to

 

the operator requiring the operator to restore the land to its condition before the

 

code right was exercised.

 

      (6)  

The notice must—

 

(a)    

comply with paragraph 85 (notices given by persons other than

 

operators), and

 

(b)    

specify the period within which the operator must complete the works.

 

      (7)  

The period specified under sub-paragraph (6) must be a reasonable one.

 

      (8)  

Sub-paragraph (9) applies if, within the period of 28 days beginning with the

 

day on which the notice was given, the landowner and the operator do not

 

reach agreement on any of the following matters—

 

(a)    

that the operator will restore the land to its condition before the code

 

right was exercised;

 

(b)    

the time at which or period within which the land will be restored.

 

      (9)  

The landowner may make an application to the court for—

 

(a)    

an order under paragraph 39(1A) (order requiring operator to restore

 

land), or

 

(b)    

an order under paragraph 39(2A) (order enabling landowner to recover

 

cost of restoring land).

 

    (10)  

If the court makes an order under paragraph 39(1A), but the operator does not

 

comply with the agreement imposed on the operator and the landowner by

 

virtue of paragraph 39(5), the landowner may make an application to the court

 

for an order under paragraph 39(2A).


 
Back to StartNext
 

Revised 20 October 2016