Telstra Corporation Ltd [2001] ACompT 4
The former Part XIC of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) empowered the Commission and the Tribunal to make determinations fixing terms and conditions, including price, retrospectively over the period of a notified access dispute. AAPT acquired a right to that statutory remedy when it notified the access dispute on 11 December 1998. The 1999 amendments, including Item 74 and s 152DNA, would otherwise limit that right, but ss 8 and 8A of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth) preserved the operation of the earlier provisions because no contrary intention was shown. The Tribunal therefore had power to determine a price for the declared PSTN services supplied by Telstra to AAPT from 1 July...
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 07 December 2001
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Review of a Final Determination by the ACCC Dated 11 September 2000 in Respect of an Access Dispute Between AAPT Limited and Telstra Corporation Limited / Preliminary Ruling on Whether the Tribunal Has Power to Determine a Price for Declared PSTN Services Supplied Before 5 July 1999
- Outcome
- The Tribunal ruled that it had power to determine a price for the supply of the declared PSTN services supplied by Telstra Corporation Ltd to AAPT Ltd during the period 1 July 1998 to 4 July 1999.
- Legal Topics
- ['telecommunications Access Regime' 'access Dispute Arbitration' 'retrospective Operation of Determinations' 'acts Interpretation Act Preservation of Accrued Rights' 'review of ACCC Final Determination']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Application for Review of a Final Determination by the ACCC Dated 11 September 2000 in Respect of an Access Dispute Between AAPT Limited and Telstra Corporation Limited / Preliminary Ruling on Whether the Tribunal Has Power to Determine a Price for Declared PSTN Services Supplied Before 5 July 1999
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the ACCC and the Australian Competition Tribunal had power, when arbitrating or reviewing an access dispute under Part XIC of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth), to make a determination with retrospective operation for the period before 5 July 1999.' 'Whether the former provisions of Part XIC empowered the Commission and the Tribunal to determine terms and conditions retrospectively over the period of an access dispute.' "Whether ss 8 and 8A of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth) preserved AAPT's right to have the access dispute notified on 11 December 1998 determined under the former Part XIC provisions."]
Ratio Decidendi
The former Part XIC of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) empowered the Commission and the Tribunal to make determinations fixing terms and conditions, including price, retrospectively over the period of a notified access dispute. AAPT acquired a right to that statutory remedy when it notified the access dispute on 11 December 1998. The 1999 amendments, including Item 74 and s 152DNA, would otherwise limit that right, but ss 8 and 8A of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth) preserved the operation of the earlier provisions because no contrary intention was shown. The Tribunal therefore had power to determine a price for the declared PSTN services supplied by Telstra to AAPT from 1 July...
Court Disposition
The Tribunal ruled that it had power to determine a price for the supply of the declared PSTN services supplied by Telstra Corporation Ltd to AAPT Ltd during the period 1 July 1998 to 4 July 1999.
Orders
- ['When carrying out the present review of the determination of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, the Tribunal has power to determine a price for the supply of the declared PSTN services supplied by Telstra Corporation Ltd to AAPT Ltd during the period 1 July 1998 to 4 July 1999.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment