Schedule 1: The electronic communications code Part 17: Supplementary provisions
Part 17 contains a number of supplementary provisions, including definitions of terms used elsewhere in the code.
	Paragraph 99 provides that the code does not authorise the contravention of any enactment made before the new code comes into force unless such an enactment itself provides otherwise. So for example, nothing in the code authorises an operator, or any other person, to do anything that would be in breach of existing planning legislation, or other legislation.
	Paragraph 100(1) concerns the binding quality of agreements made under the code, and whether it is possible to "contract out" out of provisions of the code. Agreements for code rights are final so that once agreed (see Part 2), it is not possible for either party to re-open the agreement. For example if an operator agrees to pay £5,000 for a (consensual) code agreement, the operator (or landowner) cannot then apply to the court to get a better price or improve the accompanying terms that relate to the code right that has been agreed. It is possible to vary an agreement by further agreement (see paragraph 11 of the code).
	Paragraph 100(2) ensures that an operator cannot be required by a landowner to agree to exclude the effect of paragraph 99 and Parts 3 to 6 of the code. This is commonly known as a "no contracting out" rule. (There is similar provision in what was paragraph 27(2) of the existing code in Schedule 2 to the Telecommunications Act 1984). Paragraphs 16(1) and 17(5) of the code prevent the possibility that operators could be required to contract out of the automatic upgrading and sharing rights provided by those paragraphs, and the reference in paragraph 100(2) to Part 3 is to ensure consistency between paragraph 100 and those provisions. Part 5 provides for code agreements to continue, notwithstanding the terms of the agreement, and to be terminated only in accordance with the provisions of the code. Part 6 provides for apparatus to be removed only in accordance with the provisions of the code. So paragraph 100(2) ensures that operators cannot be required to contract out of the rights they enjoy under Parts 5 and 6 which are essential to protect networks. In the existing code, what was paragraph 27(2) similarly prevented parties contracting out of what was paragraph 21 of the existing code.
	Similarly an operator cannot be required to agree that it will forgo its right to make an application to the court under Part 4 for a different or additional code right (for which it would have to pay additional consideration). For example an operator may have an agreement with a site provider under which the operator is entitled to enter the land to maintain apparatus on terms that it gives at least 72 hours’ notice (see paragraph 3(f) of the code). The operator might later wish to seek a different code agreement, e.g. to enter the land to maintain apparatus giving only 48 hours’ notice. That would be a new right, more onerous for the landowner, which would have to be agreed on further terms, including as to payment. Failing agreement, the operator could apply to the court to be granted the new right. The court would be required to apply the test under paragraph 21.
	Paragraph 101. Under general land law, a movable object (a "chattel") that is attached to the land may become, by operation of the law, part of the land (and consequently become the property of the owner of the land) if it has become a "fixture". Paragraph 101 prevents this from happening to apparatus installed on the land by an operator using code rights by providing that property rights in apparatus are unaffected by that apparatus becoming attached to land. A similar provision was contained in what was paragraph 27(4) of the existing code in Schedule 2 to the Telecommunications Act 1984.
	Paragraph 102 replicates what was paragraph 15 of the existing code. Its effect is that an operator must have the agreement of the authority with control of a relevant conduit to install apparatus in that conduit (i.e. such rights cannot be ordered by the court under Part 4).
	Paragraph 103 obliges Ofcom to publish a code of practice on the operation of the code and suggested (but not mandatory) standard terms for use in code agreements. These may be updated from time to time. Ofcom is required to consult with operators and anyone else it thinks appropriate before it first publishes the code of practice and suggested standard terms.
	Paragraph 104 provides that Crown land (meaning, primarily, land owned or leased by the government) is subject to the code in the same way as any other land. It also sets out who has the authority to enter into agreements or grant code rights over various different categories of Crown land.
	Paragraph 105 sets out the meaning of "occupier" for the purposes of the code.
	Paragraph 106 makes provisions for the Scottish Ministers to make rules for the Lands Tribunal for Scotland in relation to the code.
	Paragraph 107 makes provision in relation to arbitration in Scotland.
	Paragraph 108 defines other terms used within the code including the definition of land under the code, which excludes electronic communications apparatus, thereby ensuring that code rights cannot be used to confer rights to install electronic communications apparatus on another person’s apparatus. Paragraph 108(2) defines "alteration" of apparatus as including moving, removing and replacing that apparatus.