Search

ARCHIVED - Telecom Costs Order CRTC 2004-14

This page has been archived on the Web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.

Archived

This page has been archived on the Web.

 

Telecom Costs Order CRTC 2004-14

  Ottawa, 4 November 2004
 

Application for costs by the Public Interest Advocacy Centre on behalf of the Consumer Groups - Consumer bill of rights - Telecom Public Notice CRTC 2003-6

  Reference: 8665-C12-200307365 and 4754-233

1.

By letter dated 19 March 2004, the Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC) on behalf of the Consumers' Association of Canada, the National Anti-Poverty Organization, l'Union des consommateurs, the BC Old Age Pensioners' Organization, the Council of Senior Citizens' Organizations of BC, federated anti-poverty groups of BC, the Senior Citizens' Association of BC, the West End Seniors' Network, End Legislated Poverty, the BC Coalition for Information Access, the Tenants Rights Action Coalition, the Consumers Association of Canada (MB. Branch) and the Manitoba Society of Seniors (collectively, the Consumer Groups) applied for costs with respect to their participation in the proceeding initiated by Consumer bill of rights, Telecom Public Notice CRTC 2003-6, 13 June 2003 (the Public Notice 2003-6 proceeding). In their application, the Consumer Groups took no position regarding the appropriate respondents to their application, other than to note that this was an industry-wide proceeding that was of principal concern to the incumbent local exchange carriers (ILECs) who were made party to this proceeding.

2.

On 6 April 2004, the ILECs made party to the Public Notice 2003-6 proceeding, Aliant Telecom Inc., Bell Canada, MTS Communications Inc., Saskatchewan Telecommunications and, Société en commandite Télébec (collectively, the Companies) and TELUS Communications Inc. (TCI) and TELUS Communications (Québec) Inc. (collectively, TELUS) jointly wrote to the Commission stating that they had no objection to the applicants' entitlement to costs or the amount claimed.

 

The application

3.

PIAC submitted that the Consumer Groups had met the criteria for an award of costs set out in subsection 44(1) of the CRTC Telecommunications Rules of Procedure (the Rules) as they represented a group of subscribers that had an interest in the outcome of the Public Notice 2003-6 proceeding, they participated responsibly and contributed to a better understanding of the issues by the Commission through their participation in the Public Notice 2003-6 proceeding.

4.

In particular, PIAC submitted that the Consumer Groups had participated responsibly through their efforts to coordinate their intervention with other subscriber group intervenors which helped to minimize duplication of effort, and focus the submissions of the intervenors. Additionally, PIAC submitted that the Consumer Groups contributed to a better understanding of the issues by the Commission through their comments in the Public Notice 2003-6 proceeding.

5.

PIAC requested that the Commission fix the Consumer Groups' costs at $37,472.36 consisting of $7,046.28 for legal fees, $22,368.94 in consultant fees and $8,057.14 in analyst fees. The Consumer Groups' claim included the Federal Goods and Services Tax (GST) on legal and consultant fees less the rebate to which PIAC is entitled in connection with the GST. The Consumer Groups filed a bill of costs with their application.

6.

As noted above, the Consumer Groups took no position regarding the appropriate respondents to their application, other than to note that this was an industry wide proceeding that was of principal concern to the ILECs who were made party to this proceeding.
 

Commission analysis and determination

7.

The Commission finds that the Consumer Groups have met the criteria for a costs award set out in subsection 44(1) of the Rules. Specifically, the Commission finds that the Consumer Groups are representative of a group or class of subscribers that has an interest in the outcome of the Public Notice 2003-6 proceeding, have participated in a responsible manner, and have contributed to a better understanding of the issues by the Commission.

8.

The Commission notes that the rates claimed in respect of legal fees, consultant fees and analyst fees are in accordance with the rates set out in the Legal Directorate's Guidelines for the Taxation of Costs, revised as of 15 May 1998. The Commission also finds that the total amount claimed by the Consumer Groups was necessarily and reasonably incurred and should be allowed.

9.

The Commission is of the view that this is an appropriate case in which to fix the costs and dispense with taxation in accordance with the streamlined procedure set out in New Procedure for Telecom costs awards, Telecom Public Notice CRTC 2002-5, 7 November 2002.

10.

With respect to the issue of the appropriate respondents, the Commission notes that it has generally determined that the appropriate respondents to an award of costs are the parties who are affected by the issues and have participated actively in the proceeding.

11.

The Commission notes, however, that it has recognized the fact that if too large a number of respondents are named, the applicant may have to collect small amounts from many respondents.

12.

The Commission finds that it would impose an unnecessary administrative burden on the Consumer Groups to require the collection of small amounts from the seven telecommunications service providers who participated in the Public Notice 2003-6 proceeding.

13.

The Commission finds, therefore, that the appropriate respondents to the Consumer Groups' costs application are the Companies and TELUS.

14.

The Commission notes that it has, in previous decisions, allocated the responsibility for the payment of costs among respondents on the basis of the respondents' telecommunications operating revenues (TORs), as an indicator of the relative size and interest of the parties involved in the proceeding. The Commission is of the view that, in the present circumstances, it is appropriate to apportion the costs among the respondents in proportion to their TORs, as reported in their most recent audited financial statements. Given the relative differences in telecommunications revenues between the Companies and TELUS, the Commission finds that the responsibility for the payment of costs should be allocated as follows:
    The Companies 76%
    TELUS 24%

15.

The Commission notes that Bell Canada filed submissions on behalf of the Companies and TELUS. Consistent with its general approach articulated in Action Réseau Consommateur, the Consumers' Association of Canada, Fédération des associations coopératives d'économie familiale and the National Anti-Poverty Organization application for costs - Public Notice CRTC 2001-60, Telecom Costs Order CRTC 2002-4, 24 April 2002, the Commission makes Bell Canada responsible for payment on behalf of the Companies and TCI responsible for payment on behalf of TELUS and leaves it to the members of the Companies and TELUS to determine the appropriate allocation of the costs among themselves.
 

Direction as to costs

16.

The Commission approves the application by the Consumer Groups for costs with respect to their participation in the Public Notice 2003-6 proceeding.

17.

Pursuant to subsection 56(1) of the Telecommunications Act, the Commission fixes the costs to be paid to PIAC at $37,472.36.

18.

The Commission directs that the award of costs to the Consumer Groups be paid forthwith by Bell Canada on behalf of the Companies and TCI on behalf of TELUS according to the proportions set out in paragraph 14.
  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: 2004-11-04

Date modified: