In Telus Communications Inc. v. Federation of Canadian Municipalities, 2025 SCC 15 (“Telus”) the Supreme Court of Canada considered whether the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) has the authority to grant telecommunications carriers access to install modern wireless infrastructure, specifically, 5G small cell antennas, on public lands without local government consent. The court concluded that it does not.

The decision affirms that the CRTC’s “Access Regime,” as set out under Sections 43 and 44 of the Telecommunications Act, applies only to traditional wireline infrastructure and not to wireless network infrastructure. As a result, telecommunications carriers seeking to install 5G wireless infrastructure on public property must negotiate directly with local governments. This is an important clarification for local governments and other public authorities managing the increasing number of requests related to the national 5G network infrastructure rollout.

The Access Regime: A Primer

Under Sections 43 and 44 of the Telecommunications Act, telecommunications carriers are granted a qualified right of access to construct, maintain, and operate “transmission lines” on public property, including highways and local government lands. This framework is often referred to as the “Access Regime.”

The Access Regime permits carriers to apply to the CRTC for authorization to install transmission lines on public property where local government consent is not granted (Section 43(4)). It also allows local governments to apply to the CRTC to require changes to the route (Section 44(a)) or to prohibit the project entirely (Section 44(b)). Historically, this regime has enabled local governments and telecommunications carriers to collaborate on infrastructure projects while maintaining a regulatory backstop.

However, the Access Regime has been largely shaped by wireline technologies: cables and conduits buried under roads or strung along poles. The transition to 5G, which requires more frequent installation of smaller, low-range wireless antennas mounted on public infrastructure, raised a key question: do these wireless devices also fall within the Access Regime?

5G Infrastructure and the Dispute in Telus

Unlike 4G networks, which rely heavily on tall cell towers and centralized coverage areas, 5G technology requires the deployment of a large number of small cell antennas distributed throughout the built environment. These antennas are often installed on public assets such as streetlights, utility poles, transit shelters, and public buildings.

In anticipation of this infrastructure shift, the CRTC conducted a review and consultation on the Access Regime. A group of telecommunications carriers asked the CRTC to reinterpret the Access Regime to include these smaller 5G cell antennae. In 2021, the CRTC declined, concluding that it lacked the statutory authority to intervene and authorize the installation of wireless infrastructure without local government consent. In the CRTC’s view, the term “transmission line” refers only to physical wireline infrastructure.

The telecommunications carriers challenged the decision, arguing that the meaning of “transmission line” is dynamic and should evolve to include new wireless technologies that, while not physically linear in the traditional sense, nonetheless serve a similar functional purpose. The case made its way to the Supreme Court of Canada, with the Federation of Canadian Municipalities intervening in support of the CRTC’s interpretation.

The Supreme Court’s Decision

The Supreme Court upheld the decisions of both the CRTC and the Federal Court of Appeal, ruling that the Access Regime does not extend to wireless infrastructure.

In its analysis, the Court emphasized the ordinary and grammatical meaning of the phrase “transmission line,” finding that it refers to physical and tangible infrastructure, such as cables, wires, and similar conduits, not to wireless components such as antennas. The Court also rejected the argument that antennas, by virtue of being attached to wireline systems, should be considered part of the transmission line itself.

The Court also noted that the structure of the Telecommunications Act reinforces a narrow reading of “transmission line.” The relevant sections consistently reference activities such as breaking up pavement, burying infrastructure, and altering underground routes, all of which clearly relate to physical construction. Further, nearby provisions in the Telecommunications Act provide rights to local governments similar to the Access Regime which apply to laying of drainage works or utility pipes on, over, under, or along a transmission line, making it unlikely that Parliament intended the term to stretch to include individual wireless devices mounted aboveground.

Key Implications for Local Governments

For local governments, Telus is a welcome clarification of regulatory authority. The decision confirms that local governments retain control over the placement of 5G wireless infrastructure on public property. Telecommunications carriers cannot invoke the Access Regime to bypass local government consent when deploying antennas and other wireless hardware on local government lands.

Going forward, local governments can expect an increase in requests from telecommunications carriers seeking to install 5G equipment on local government assets. With industry estimates forecasting the installation of hundreds of thousands of small antennas across Canada in the coming years, much of that infrastructure will fall within the jurisdiction of local governments.

Local governments should consider developing clear policies, application procedures, and licensing frameworks to govern the deployment of 5G infrastructure. This includes establishing standard terms for access agreements, reviewing insurance and indemnity requirements, and ensuring coordination between departments responsible for public works, utilities, and land use planning.

While the Telus decision protects local government authority, it also places the onus on local governments to manage negotiations and ensure that wireless infrastructure deployment aligns with local priorities, aesthetics, safety standards, and long-term infrastructure planning.