Telecom Procedural Letter Addressed to Distribution List
Ottawa, 8 June 2018
Our reference: 8690-V81-201703231
Dear Madam or Sir:
RE: Request for permission from the City of Laval to intervene in the Part I application filed by the City of Gatineau for a Municipal Access Agreement (MAA) – Commission’s decision
On May 7, 2018, the City of Laval (Laval) filed an application for permission to intervene in the City of Gatineau (Gatineau) MAA proceeding for which the intervention period ended on June 16, 2017. Laval indicated that it had no reason to intervene by the end of the intervention period, but the situation had since changed.
Laval noted that, unlike the cities of Gatineau and Terrebonne, it agreed to an out-of-court settlement with the CarriersFootnote1 on June 5, 2017, with regard to a constitutional bylaw.Footnote2 As part of the out-of-court settlement, the parties committed to negotiate an MAA in the form prescribed by the Commission. As agreed between the parties, Laval’s lawyers sent the Carriers a draft MAA concerning the City of Laval on October 5, 2017. Laval added that, since the transmission of its draft MAA to the Carriers, the latter has never followed up on negotiations, despite several reminders.
Laval stated that a number of points of dispute in the Gatineau MAA case could be the subject of complex negotiations between Laval and the Carriers, notably on the relocation cost reimbursement formula. Laval indicated that the Commission could benefit from its observations and expertise before making a decision on the Gatineau application, which could affect the negotiations to be held between Laval and the Carriers concerning an MAA for the City of Laval.
On May 9, 2018, the Carriers objected to Laval’s application to intervene and indicated, among other things, that the decision to be rendered by the Commission in the Gatineau case will have a limited scope that will concern only Gatineau.
The Carriers added that the City of Gatineau case is practically closed. They submitted that this file, which has been open for over a year, is complex, and that accepting Laval’s request would delay the Commission’s decision to the detriment of both the Carriers and Gatineau. The Carriers also indicated that they are willing to negotiate with Laval.
Commission’s analysis and determination
Laval had the opportunity to intervene when the MAA application was published on April 10, 2017 until the end of the intervention period on June 16, 2017.
In the context of MAA applications, the Commission decides on the specific points of dispute between the parties concerned. The Commission handles applications on a case-by-case basis, and, therefore, decisions made in the context of an MAA application do not automatically and directly affect another application.
The City of Laval’s intervention would delay the disposition of the Gatineau application for which the file is almost completed.
In addition, the Carriers have indicated that they are willing to negotiate an MAA with Laval, and Laval will have the opportunity, if it so desires, to submit its own application to the Commission in the event that it is not satisfied with the results of its negotiations with the Carriers.
In light of the above, the Commission denies Laval’s application.
Original signed by
Alexandre Thériault-Marois, attorney
Legal Affairs – SAJVL
Civil and Administrative Law Section
600-1200 Chomedey Blvd., P.O. Box 422,
SAINT-MARTIN Branch, Laval, Quebec H7V 3Z4
Bélanger Sauvé L.L.P.
Representing the City of Gatineau
5 Place Ville Marie, Suite 900
Montréal, Québec H8B 2G2
Vice-President, Legal Affairs
Cogeco Connexion Inc.
Michael E. Piaskoski
Director, Municipal Relations
Institutional and Regulatory Affairs
Rogers Communications Canada Inc.
Prévost Fortin D’Aoust, attorneys
Representing the Carriers
20845 Côte du Nord Road, Suite 500
Boisbriand, Quebec J7E 4H5
Senior Legal Counsel
Vice-President, Regulatory Affairs, Telecommunications
Quebecor Media Inc.
Director, Regulatory Affairs
Access Policy Management
TELUS Communications Inc.
- Date modified: