ARCHIVED - Telecom Costs Order CRTC 98-17
This page has been archived on the Web
Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. Archived Decisions, Notices and Orders (DNOs) remain in effect except to the extent they are amended or reversed by the Commission, a court, or the government. The text of archived information has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Changes to DNOs are published as “dashes” to the original DNO number. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats by contacting us.
Telecom Costs Order |
|
Ottawa, 10 September 1998
|
|
Telecom Costs Order CRTC 98-17
|
|
In re: Competition in the Provision of International Telecommunications Services - Telecom Public Notice CRTC 97-34
|
|
File No.: 8622-C12-01/97
|
|
Application for costs by the Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC).
|
|
BACKGROUND
|
|
1.By letter dated 7 May 1998, PIAC applied for costs incurred in relation to its participation in the above-noted proceeding. In its application, PIAC submitted that its participation was responsible and should advance the understanding of the Commission with respect to the position of vulnerable and other residential consumers. PIAC noted that its participation included the submission of interrogatories, comments and reply comments.
|
|
2.In its answer, dated 15 May 1998, Stentor Resource Centre inc. (Stentor) indicated that it had no comments to make with respect to PIAC's application. Stentor submitted that the appropriate respondents to any award of costs would be Teleglobe Canada Inc. (Teleglobe) and any other parties which have participated actively in the proceeding and which have a significant interest in the outcome of the proceeding (i.e. those who would potentially be licensed international service providers under the new regulatory regime for international telecommunications services).
|
|
3.With respect to the appropriate allocation of costs among respondents, Stentor noted that Teleglobe is the incumbent monopoly provider of international telecommunications services. In light of this fact, and given the overall relative significance of the proceeding for Teleglobe, Stentor submitted that Teleglobe should bear a substantial portion of any costs awarded, with the remaining amounts apportioned equally among the other respondents as determined by the Commission.
|
|
4.No other comments were received.
|
|
COMMISSION DETERMINATION
|
|
5.The Commission is of the view that PIAC has a sufficient interest in the outcome of the proceeding, has participated responsibly and has contributed to a better understanding of the issues under consideration. Accordingly, the Commission considers that PIAC has met the criteria for an award of costs set out in subsection 44(1) of the CRTC Telecommunications Rules of Procedure (the Rules) and should be awarded costs for its participation in this proceeding.
|
|
6.With respect to the question of which parties are appropriate respondents for costs, the Commission is of the view, consistent with recent Costs Orders, that those parties who have a significant interest in the outcome of the proceeding and who have participated actively in the proceeding should be named as respondents. The Commission considers that a party has participated actively in this proceeding if it has filed evidence and submitted interrogatories.
|
|
7.Applying the above criteria, the Commission considers that the following parties should be named as respondents: Teleglobe, AT&T Canada Enterprises Inc. (ACE), AT&T Canada Long Distance Services Company (AT&T Canada LDS), Call-Net Enterprises Inc. (Call-Net), GeoReach Telecommunications Inc. (GeoReach), London Telecom Network Inc. (London Telecom), MCI International Inc. (MCI), North America Gateway Inc. (NAG), Stentor (on behalf of BC TEL, Bell Canada, Island Telecom Inc., Maritime Tel & Tel Limited, MTS Communications Inc., NB Tel Inc. and TELUS Communications Inc.).
|
|
8.The Commission notes that all of the parties named as respondents submitted proposals, comments and interrogatories in the course of this proceeding. As current or potential providers of international telecommunications services, these parties also have a significant interest in the outcome of the proceeding.
|
|
9.With respect to the allocation of costs among the respondents, the Commission agrees with Stentor that, given the relative significance of this proceeding for Teleglobe, and in light of the fact that it is the incumbent monopoly provider of international telecommunications services, Teleglobe should bear a substantial portion of the costs awarded. Accordingly, the Commission is of the view that Teleglobe should be responsible for 60% of the costs awarded and that the remaining respondents should each be responsible for 5%.
|
|
DIRECTION AS TO COSTS
|
|
10.PIAC's application for an award of costs in respect of this proceeding is approved.
|
|
11.Costs awarded herein shall be paid to PIAC by the following respondents in the proportions set out below:
|
|
Teleglobe 60%
ACE 5% AT&T Canada LDS 5% Call-Net 5% GeoReach 5% London Telecom 5% MCI 5% NAG 5% Stentor 5% 100% |
|
12.Costs awarded herein shall be subject to taxation in accordance with the Rules.
|
|
13.Costs awarded herein shall be taxed by Margot Patterson.
|
|
14.PIAC shall, within 30 days of the issuance of this Order, submit a bill of costs and an affidavit of disbursements directly to the Taxing Officer, serving a copy on each respondent.
|
|
15.The respondents may, within two weeks of receipt of those documents, file comments directly with the Taxing Officer with respect to the costs claimed, serving a copy on PIAC.
|
|
16.PIAC may, within two weeks of receiving the comments, file a reply directly with the Taxing Officer, serving copies on the respondents.
|
|
17.Costs are payable forthwith upon issuance of the Taxation Order.
|
|
18.Documents to be filed or served by a specific date must be actually received, not merely sent, by that date.
|
|
Laura M. Talbot-Allan
Secretary General |
|
This document is available in alternative format upon request.
|
|
COS98-17_0
|
- Date modified: