ARCHIVED - Telecom Commission Letter - 8622-A53-200504953
This page has been archived on the Web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.
LetterDelivered by e-mail File #: 8622-A53-200504953 Ottawa, 30 May 2005
Mr. Daniel M. Campbell, Q.C. Dear Mr. Campbell; Re: Part VII Application filed by Aliant Telecom Inc. for interim relief from the local winback rules and the suspension of consideration of local promotions; File No. 8622-A53-200504953 In your letter of 25 May 2005 , you requested on behalf of your client, Aliant Telecom Inc. (Aliant), a Commission determination on its request for interim relief from the local winback rules and the rules on local promotions. In light of that request, Commission staff considers it appropriate to reopen the file on this application and to complete the record of the proceeding. Once the record is complete, the Commission will render a decision on Aliant's request. Parties wishing to file an answer to Aliant's Part VII application must do so on or before 29 June 2005 , serving a copy on Aliant. Aliant will then be entitled to file reply comments on or before 11 July 2005 , serving a copy on those who filed and served answers.
Parties are reminded that before granting a party interim relief under section 61(2) of the Telecommunications Act (the Act), the Commission has required the party requesting the relief to demonstrate that it meets the criteria for interim relief set out by the Supreme Court of Canada in Manitoba (Attorney General) v. Metropolitan Stores (MTS) Ltd. [1987] 1 S.C.R. 110, as modified by the Court's decision in RJR-MacDonald Inc. v. Canada (Attorney General) [1994] 1 S.C.R. 311. These criteria are that: Parties are further reminded that w here a document is to be filed or served by a specific date, the document must be actually received, not merely sent, by that date. Sincerely,
Len Katz cc. ILECs, CLECs, WSPs, CCTA Date Modified: 2005-05-30 |
- Date modified: