[2002] EWHC 2417 (Ch), 15 November 2002. Examined the interpretation of the word 'land' as used in the Electricity Act 1989 Sched 4 para 6. The first defendant (L), as a licence holder under the 1989 Act, applied for a wayleave to install additional cables in a service tunnel that ran under a cutting between two docks owned by the claimant (B). B refused so L applied to the second defendant SoS Trade for a compulsory conferment of wayleave as under the Electricity Act 1989 Sched 4 para 6(3). This allows a licence holder to be granted a wayleave to install and keep installed an electricity line on, under or over any 'land'. B disputed that 'land' could not have its normal meaning as in the Interpretation Act 1978 s5 and Sched 1 and that consequently the service tunnel was not 'land' and a wayleave could not be granted in respect of it. "Held": the SoS held the power to grant the wayleave through the service tunnel, in accordance with the Electricity Act 1989 Sched 4. Compensation would be decided by the LT. Therefore the service tunnel could be considered as 'land'.