ARCHIVED - Taxation Order CRTC 2000-6
This page has been archived on the Web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.
|
Taxation Order CRTC 2000-6 |
|
|
Ottawa, 14 June 2000 |
|
|
In re: Review of frozen contribution rate policy – Telecom Public Notice CRTC 99-5 |
|
|
Reference: 8692-C12-01/99 and 4768-086 |
|
|
1. |
Philippa Lawson for Action Réseau Consommateur, the Consumers' Association of Canada and the National Anti-Poverty Organization (ARC/CAC/NAPO). |
|
Taxation of costs of ARC/CAC/NAPO |
|
|
Taxing Officer: Leanne Bennett |
|
|
2. |
This order constitutes the taxation of costs awarded to ARC/CAC/NAPO in the proceeding initiated by Telecom Public Notice CRTC 99-5, Proceeding to review frozen contribution rate policy, 2 February 1999. |
|
3. |
In Costs Order CRTC 2000-1, dated 18 January 2000, costs were awarded to ARC/CAC/NAPO in accordance with subsection 44(1) of the CRTC Telecommunications Rules of Procedure (the Rules), payable by Bell Canada, on behalf of itself and Island Telecom Inc. (Island Tel), Maritime Tel & Tel Limited (MTT), MTS Communications Inc., NBTel Inc. and NewTel Communications Inc. (collectively, Bell Canada et al.); BC TEL on behalf of itself and TELUS Communications Inc. (TCI); AT&T Canada Corp.; Call-Net Enterprises Inc.; RSL COM Canada Inc.; and London Telecom Network Inc. |
|
4. |
On 3 February 2000, ARC/CAC/NAPO submitted its Bill of Costs consisting of $8,893.24 in fees and no disbursements. |
|
5. |
TCI and TELUS Communications (B.C.) Inc. (the successor company to BC TEL) filed a joint comment on 17 February 2000 stating that the costs claimed are reasonable for the level of participation by ARC/CAC/NAPO in the proceeding. |
|
6. |
Bell Canada et al. filed a comment on 25 February 2000. It had no comment on the amounts claimed by ARC/CAC/NAPO. |
|
Fees |
|
|
a) Counsel fees |
|
|
7. |
ARC/CAC/NAPO claimed a total of $1,358.44 in fees for its counsel, Ms. Philippa Lawson, consisting of 7.5 hours at an hourly rate of $175 after adjustment for a 50% rebate on GST. The hourly rate claimed is within the guidelines for a counsel with six to ten years' completed practice specified by the Commission's Legal Directorate in the Guidelines for the Taxation of Costs, revised as of 15 May 1998 (the Guidelines). I consider this rate to be appropriate and will allow the rate as claimed. |
|
b) Consultant's fees |
|
|
8. |
ARC/CAC/NAPO claimed a total of $7,534.80 in fees for its consultant, Mr. John Todd, consisting of 41.6 hours at an hourly rate of $175 after adjustment for a 50% rebate on GST. The hourly rate claimed is within the guidelines for a senior consultant specified in the Guidelines. I consider this rate to be appropriate and will allow the rate as claimed. |
|
Preparation, attendance and procedural time |
|
|
9. |
ARC/CAC/NAPO claimed a total of 7.5 hours of preparation, attendance and procedural time for Ms. Lawson. I consider the time claimed to be reasonably and necessarily incurred in the circumstances. I will allow the hours claimed as presented. |
|
10. |
ARC/CAC/NAPO claimed 41.6 hours for work performed by Mr. Todd. I find this claim to be reasonable and I will allow it. |
|
Costs as taxed |
|
|
11. |
I hereby tax the fees of ARC/CAC/NAPO, inclusive of applicable taxes, as follows: |
|
Counsel fees Ms. Lawson: $1,358.44 |
|
|
Consultant fees Mr. Todd: $7,534.80 |
|
|
Total fees: $8,893.24 |
|
|
12. |
Pursuant to Costs Order 2000-1, the costs awarded to ARC/CAC/NAPO are to be paid forthwith by the respondents, and in the proportion, indicated below: |
|
Bell Canada, on behalf of itself and Island Tel, MTT, MTS, NBTel and NewTel: 40% BC TEL, on behalf of itself and TCI: 20% AT&T Canada: 16% Call-Net: 16% RSL COM: 4% London Telecom: 4% |
|
|
13. |
In its 25 February 2000 comment, Bell Canada et al. asked for clarification of the separate percentages payable by each of the companies in the Bell Canada et al. group. Bell Canada et al. noted that the Commission had provided such a clarification regarding Taxation Order CRTC 99-2 in a letter to the former Stentor members dated 12 November 1999. In that letter the separate percentages applied to each of the former Stentor members was based on the 1998 telecommunications revenues for each of the members. |
|
14. |
Therefore, for clarification purposes and on the same basis, that is using the 1998 telecommunications revenues for each of the following companies, their individual share of the costs payable forthwith by Bell Canada, on behalf of Bell Canada et al., to ARC/CAC/NAPO is as follows: |
| Bell Canada |
33.8% |
|
| Island Tel |
0.2% |
|
| MTT |
1.7% |
|
| MTS |
1.9% |
|
| NBTel |
1.6% |
|
| NewTel |
0.8% |
|
|
TOTAL |
40% |
|
Leanne Bennett Taxing Officer |
|
|
Secretary General |
|
| This document is available in alternative format upon request and may also be examined at the following Internet site: http://www.crtc.gc.ca |
- Date modified: