ARCHIVED - Letter
This page has been archived on the Web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.
Ottawa, 30 September 2009
Mr. Hank Intven
McCarthy Tétrault LLP
Box 48, Suite 5300
Toronto Dominion Bank Tower
Toronto, Ontario
M5K 1E6
Email: hintven@mccarthy.ca
Dear Mr. Intven:
RE: CONFIDENTIALITY CLAIM – OT UNDERTAKING TO VENDOR: Proceeding to consider the compliance of Globalive with the ownership and control regime, Telecom Notice of Consultation CRTC 2009-429
Commission staff is in receipt of a confidentiality claim dated 28 September 2009 , filed on behalf of Globalive Wireless Management Corporation (Globalive).
In that letter, Globalive claimed confidentiality over a copy of an undertaking provided by Orascom Telecom Holding S.A.E. to a vendor (the Document). Globalive's claim was made on the basis that the disclosure of the Document would cause specific direct harm to vendors in their contractual negotiations with other customers, resulting in material financial loss, and strongly objected to the public disclosure of the Document, in whole or in part.
On 29 September 2009 , Rogers Communications Inc. and Bell Canada filed letters with the Commission, requesting that an abridged copy of the Document be placed on the public record. In its letter, Rogers argued that while the details of the Document need not be disclosed, the nature of the undertaking provided, the type of vendor arrangement, and the amount of any financial commitment therein, were relevant to the issues in the proceeding and should therefore be placed on the public record.
In a reply letter dated 29 September 2009 , Globalive reiterated its objection to the disclosure of an abridged version of the Document.
In evaluating confidentiality claims filed pursuant to subsection 39(1) of the Telecommunications Act (the Act), an assessment is made as to whether there is any specific direct harm likely to result to any person from the disclosure of the information in question. In making this evaluation, a number of factors are taken into consideration, including the degree of competition that exists in a particular market or that is expected to occur. All things being equal, the greater the degree of actual or expected competition, the greater the specific direct harm that could be expected to result from disclosure. Another factor is the expected usefulness of the information at issue to parties in furthering their competitive position.
Even where specific direct harm may result, this harm must be balanced against, and outweigh the public interest in disclosure, in order to qualify for confidentiality. In certain circumstances, specific direct harm from disclosure may still be outweighed by the public interest in disclosure.
Having regard to the above, and the fact that the information contained in the Document is of a highly sensitive nature, Commission staff has determined that the specific direct harm that would likely result from disclosure of the Document outweighs the public interest in its disclosure. Accordingly, Globalive is not required to file an abridged version of the Document.
Sincerely,
Original signed by
Stephen Millington
Senior Legal Counsel
c.c.: Interested Parties to Notice of Consultation CRTC 2009-429
- Date modified: