Cable and Wireless plans to continue to find ways to challenge an ICTA decision that was upheld in Grand Court.
‘We are disappointed with the decision made by the court and believe it is not in the best interest of our landline and mobile customers who will continue to pay the high prices and interconnection rates advocated by Digicel,’ C&W said in a press release. ‘We believe in giving customers the best possible deal and we will continue to look for avenues to address this matter.’
Digicel, however, welcomes the ruling of Chief Justice Anthony Smellie.
The Grand Court of the Cayman Islands rejected C&W’s attempts to challenge a decision of the ICTA made on 14 December, 2006,
C&W was seeking to challenge the contractually agreed Mobile Termination Rate that exists between itself and Digicel. C&W’s efforts to do so through the judicial review were rejected in a lengthy judgment delivered to the parties on Thursday and costs were awarded against C & W in favour of ICTA and Digicel.
‘Digicel is very pleased that the Grand Court has ruled in favour of Digicel and the Authority and has rejected C&W’s application which sought to challenge an agreement freely entered into between Digicel and C&W in July 2004 and one that C&W have relied on to their own ends on numerous occasions subsequently,’ said Digicel Cayman CEO John D. Buckley via a press release.
The ICTA rejected C&W’s request for determination of various matters relating to the MTR as made by C&W on 25 October, 2006. C&W sought to judicially review this decision of ICTA and made an ex-parte application to the Grand Court in February. Leave was granted to C&W at the ex-parte stage by the Justice Smellie, which permitted C&W to challenge ICTA’s decision through the courts.
The ICTA and Digicel both issued summonses seeking to set aside the leave granted to C&W. Both the ICTA and Digicel maintained that C&W had failed in its duty to make full disclosure of material information to the court at the ex-parte stage. The ICTA and Digicel also claimed that C&W had no arguable case to seek to challenge the ICTA decision and that C&W was guilty of delay in seeking judicial review on matters which date back to July 2004.
The ICTA’s and Digicel’s application was heard over two days in June and a decision was delivered Thursday.
The Court ruled that C&W had failed in its duty of material disclosure and that on hearing the applications of ICTA and Digicel, it was apparent that C&W had no arguable case. The Court also found that C&W was also guilty of delay as maintained by ICTA and Digicel.