The limits of Alternative Uses and Hope Value in Code Valuations 22 May 2026
In the decision of On Tower UK Limited v AP Wireless II (UK) Limited, the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) considered the availability and approach to the valuation of alternative uses for determining consideration under para. 24 of the Code.
In respect of four sites, the site provider sought to rely on the possibility of alternatives uses (storage) for three of the sites and hope value (residential development) for the fourth when contending for Code consideration ranging from £4800 to £6950.
Kester Lees KC and Imogen Dodds acted for the successful operator in resisting alternative use entirely in respect of one of the sites and reducing the consideration to £3,000 and £2,750 for the other two (as opposed to the £6000 and £6200 claimed). The case on hope value was also rejected as the possibility of development was too remote at this stage.
The Decision provides helpful guidance as to what a site provider must prove when seeking to rely on alternative use or hope value; it also sheds light on how the Tribunal will approach the valuation exercise.
In respect of the two sites where there was no alternative use or hope value whatsoever, the Tribunal determined that the appropriate consideration was £1,850pa (namely the £1,750 determined by the Upper Tribunal in EE Ltd v AP Wireless II(UK) Ltd [2024] UKUT 216 (LC), also known as “Vache Farm”, adjusted for inflation); rejecting the site provider’s argument and evidence that these figures should be reviewed for industrial type sites and set at circa £2500.
Perhaps most importantly, in reaching these lower figures even where alternative use value was established, the Tribunal accepted On Tower’s argument that the benefits and burdens were already baked into such storage use (contrasted to passive land use), which meant that only an additional £500 (rather than either the Vache Farm £750 or the circa £1250 to £1600 contended for by the site provider’s valuer) should be added to reflect the additional benefits and burdens of telecommunications use.
A copy of the decision is here.
Kester Lees KC and Imogen Dodds acted for On Tower UK Limited, instructed by Alicia Foo, James Lilley and Connor Merrifield of Pinsent Masons, together with Naomi Campbell and Siobhan Crowther of Cellnex.
Download: The limits of Alternative Uses and Hope Value in Code Valuations
Back to articles
