<strong> </strong>The Court of Appeal held the agreement was not a valid lease and was, therefore, a contractual licence. The term granted was uncertain because it could not be known when the agreement would end until notice to terminate was served. English law states that for a lease to be valid, it must be granted for determinable period of time and give exclusive possession of land to the tenant.

If it failed as a lease, AP Wireless argued that the agreement was a periodic tenancy based on the regular payments of rent and that exclusive possession of the land was granted to On Tower. However, the Court decided that the agreement was also not a periodic tenancy and this argument failed.