eircom wins the court case

damien

Just heard from a source. More info on the way.

Trampas

Is this against Smart telecom if not what case is it??

damien

I believe it to be the LLU one against ComReg.

Sponge Bob

Bugger That

paulm17781

That's not good. This probably means they wont have to provide LLU now

kasintahan

paulm17781 wrote:

That's not good. This probably means they wont have to provide LLU now

Is it not against EU directives (?) to reject LLU requests?

Sponge Bob

they will have to provide LLU but they need not provide an automated process which would make it easy and straightforward.

viking

Eircom did not reject LLU requests, they rejected making the changes that OLO's requested in order to have a proper functioning LLU ordering system.

Sponge Bob

Eircom rejected the timetable for coming up with a proposal(s) and attending a meeting , that was 6 months ago. Of course this whole glacial LLU process started in 1999 but never mind that we are working at Comreg speed here.

The court found for Eircom purely on the issue of the notice period for that one particular meeting in early Feb and the notice Eircom got to attend that particular meeting (but the court hopefully also said that 6 months was reasonable so that meeting is next tuesday )

Cuauhtemoc

they will have to provide LLU but they need not provide an automated process which would make it easy and straightforward.

So to clarify - LLU will never be an automated process and will always happen at a snails pace?
How could the courts justify that?
It just makes competition from smart and others that much more difficult.

Great start to the weekend!

Praetorian

I'm only speculating, but ComReg probably were not well prepared in court and Eircom's lawyers probably ran rings around them.

paulm17781

kasintahan wrote:

Is it not against EU directives (?) to reject LLU requests?

I know, I was joking. Eircom just seem to delay LLU as much as possible and now they have no reason hurry up.

damien

Well from what Spongebob heard it seems like they ruled ComReg didn't give eircom enough time which isn't too harmful. What is harmful is that to figure this out LLU automation has been put back almost 7 months. Fantastic.

damien

Praetorian wrote:

I'm only speculating, but ComReg probably were not well prepared in court and Eircom's lawyers probably ran rings around them.

I'd disagree, they had a very good legal team and they were very well prepared. I think though that this may have been the first time they went to Court whereas eircom are well experienced with the Courts.

What I do hope is that they are not discouraged about going to the Court to stand up for their decisions and that they will be happy to see eircom or Vodafone or whoever at the four goldmines again and again to defend the rights of the consumer and small business.

damien

http://www.enn.ie/frontpage/news-9627914.html

ALTO, the association representing alternative operators in the Irish communications market, has called for a streamlined process of appeals of decisions by the communications regulator ComReg. The call came in the wake of a High Court finding on Friday, following appeal proceedings by Eircom, that ComReg cannot issue enforcement decisions until after appeals have been heard by the Regulatory Appeals Panel. "This court action only relates to a narrow legal argument; however the consequence of today's decision is that Eircom can appeal every decision in order to cause delays," explained ALTO chairman Tom Hickey. "The Minister for Communications must fix this loophole by introducing a streamlined means for the hearing of appeals by the Appeals Panel."

In related news, Eircom has welcomed the decision of the High Court on Friday which it says affirms its right to appeal decisions made by ComReg. David McRedmond, commercial director of Eircom said, "Eircom has been thoroughly vindicated by today's judgement. All we seek is good and fair regulation, so that consumers can benefit from a strong and truly competitive telecoms market. The right of appeal to an independent appeals panel is imperative, and we believe this right has been secured today."

Mr_Man

if we don't like what the Appeals panel say then its back to the four courts for further delays to stifle competition.

What a farce, if the DCMNR really think that the EAP will make a blind bit of difference when it comes to speeding up the process they are badly mistaken. It is, as Comreg said at the time, another layer of uncertainty in the process. This place is so screwed up........

M.

damien

Doesn't the appeals panel have some kind of enforcement? Same as going to the high court I thought?

In regards to speed though. Eircom appealed this in February and a preliminary hearing was meant to happen on July 27th.

*puts his hand to his hear*
I think the turtle just sped past this lot.

damien

Right to appeal ComReg directions won by Eircom
http://www.irishexaminer.com/pport/web/business/Full_Story/did-sgm2BKOePRlmUsglO-LCk0lQvU.asp

Eircom has won a High Court challenge to the procedure adopted by the Commission for Communications Regulation (ComReg) in seeking to enforce directions aimed at advancing "local loop unbundling", the process of opening the last mile of Eircom's telephone network to rival firms.

Mr Justice Liam McKechnie yesterday held that ComReg, in requiring Eircom to comply by February 14th last with two directions from ComReg concerning local loop unbundling, had deprived Eircom of its rights of appeal.

He found ComReg was not entitled to limit Eircom's right of appeal, including its right to seek suspension of implementation of the directions complained of pending the appeal's outcome. The judge noted that Minister for Communications Noel Dempsey had said he would not set up an appeal panel because of the proceedings. It was difficult to see why that approach was taken, he said.

He awarded costs of the proceedings to Eircom but placed a stay on that costs order in the event of an appeal.

ComReg was established to ensure compliance with obligations regarding the supply of, and access to, telecommunications services.

In June 2004 ComReg designated Eircom as having significant market power in the market for LLU. In November 2004 ComReg drafted a Market Requirements Document (MRD) setting out requirements of other companies in relation to LLU, which envisaged those requirements would be made available by February 2005.

Eircom argued that the MRD did not adequately define the requirements being requested. ComReg did not accept it was appropriate for Eircom to analyse the MRD and an agreement was not reached at meetings between Eircom and ComReg.

On January 18th ComReg issued a decision notice (D/105), which included two directions to Eircom regarding LLU to be adhered to by February 18th.

In its High Court proceedings, Eircom claimed the requirement to adhere to those directions by February 18th infringed its right to appeal those directions within a 28-day period and to seek a suspension of those directions pending that appeal.

Mr Justice McKechnie said that as part of the appeal process, Eircom was entitled to apply to have the decisions suspended until its appeal was determined by an appeal panel. The 28-day period within which to appeal was due to expire on February 14th. ComReg had said that Eircom must comply with its two directions on February 1st and February 14th. On February 2nd it issued an enforcement notice regarding the first direction and issued a second enforcement notice on February 14th.

In imposing those time limits in circumstances where Eircom had a right to appeal and where it was also entitled to seek a suspension of the January 18th, 2005 decision pending that appeal, ComReg had deprived Eircom of its right to appeal and had acted unlawfully, the judge held.

Sponge Bob

essentially the high court defined "immediate" in Comreg terms as 28 days in real life.

thereafter the right to appeal lapses and immediate can be what it sez on the can

beller b

I'll be sticking with BT for the foreseeable future so!!

clearz

DavidMcRedmond wrote:

All we seek is good and fair regulation, so that consumers can benefit from a strong and truly competitive telecoms market.

I think im gonna puke...

junglequestions

I just did!

Eircon are getting out of control and so are Comwreck. Back handers gallore for some fatbody in comwreck i wrecken! Its total BS and something has to be done...

beller b

Has ther been any response from ireland offline?

damien

I've heard nothing. Lazy shower are probably off sunning themselves in that villa they bought for themselves at the last cash drive. Voluntary group, hah!

Cork

This is a hollow victory for Eircom. It is unfortunate that the High Court made this decision.

But LLU will come & Eircom will face more competition.


It is only a metter of time.

Mr_Man

My understanding, and I stand to be corrected on this, is that if anyone is unhappy with the outcome of the ECAP they still have the right to take the issue to the courts. This was the main reason why Comreg were so oppoosed to the establishment of the body in the first place.

As I noted earlier this is a dire situation, its only realistic outcome is to allow a decision to be dragged out for a minimum of another six months, a lifetime in the real telco world. If the DCMNR really think that any party who don't get the result they want from ECAP won't appeal it to the courts they are living on another planet.

If you look at it from Eircom's viewpoint this is great news, the cost of taking the appeal to the courts, even if they lose is going to be far less than the benefit of sitifling competition for this extended period. And given the situation of some of its competitors it could even see them go out of business in the meantime.

Total BS and another example of the wrong way to regulate a market.

M.

zuma

Could this decision spell the end for Smart Broadband???

lucernarian

That was a pretty dissapointing result for everyone who wants a good broadband service. I'm a bit confused about what I've read so far but I see a glimmer of hope in that the meeting that was supposed to happen 7 months ago will now actually take place.

Originally posted by zuma
Could this decision spell the end for Smart Broadband???

It shouldn't affect Smart to that extent unless they are financially very insecure. From what I understand, the situation won't deteriorate for Smart but it will not get better for some time now. Correct me if im wrong?

Legitimate

Right to appeal ComReg directions won by Eircom
Mary Carolan



Eircom has won a High Court challenge to the procedure adopted by the Commission for Communications Regulation (ComReg) in seeking to enforce directions aimed at advancing "local loop unbundling", the process of opening the last mile of Eircom's telephone network to rival firms.

Mr Justice Liam McKechnie yesterday held that ComReg, in requiring Eircom to comply by February 14th last with two directions from ComReg concerning local loop unbundling, had deprived Eircom of its rights of appeal.

He found ComReg was not entitled to limit Eircom's right of appeal, including its right to seek suspension of implementation of the directions complained of pending the appeal's outcome. The judge noted that Minister for Communications Noel Dempsey had said he would not set up an appeal panel because of the proceedings. It was difficult to see why that approach was taken, he said.

He awarded costs of the proceedings to Eircom but placed a stay on that costs order in the event of an appeal.

ComReg was established to ensure compliance with obligations regarding the supply of, and access to, telecommunications services.

In June 2004 ComReg designated Eircom as having significant market power in the market for LLU. In November 2004 ComReg drafted a Market Requirements Document (MRD) setting out requirements of other companies in relation to LLU, which envisaged those requirements would be made available by February 2005.

Eircom argued that the MRD did not adequately define the requirements being requested. ComReg did not accept it was appropriate for Eircom to analyse the MRD and an agreement was not reached at meetings between Eircom and ComReg.

On January 18th ComReg issued a decision notice (D/105), which included two directions to Eircom regarding LLU to be adhered to by February 18th.

In its High Court proceedings, Eircom claimed the requirement to adhere to those directions by February 18th infringed its right to appeal those directions within a 28-day period and to seek a suspension of those directions pending that appeal.

Mr Justice McKechnie said that as part of the appeal process, Eircom was entitled to apply to have the decisions suspended until its appeal was determined by an appeal panel. The 28-day period within which to appeal was due to expire on February 14th. ComReg had said that Eircom must comply with its two directions on February 1st and February 14th. On February 2nd it issued an enforcement notice regarding the first direction and issued a second enforcement notice on February 14th.

In imposing those time limits in circumstances where Eircom had a right to appeal and where it was also entitled to seek a suspension of the January 18th, 2005 decision pending that appeal, ComReg had deprived Eircom of its right to appeal and had acted unlawfully, the judge held.

eircomtribunal

Mr_Man wrote:

My understanding, and I stand to be corrected on this, is that if anyone is unhappy with the outcome of the ECAP they still have the right to take the issue to the courts. This was the main reason why Comreg were so oppoosed to the establishment of the body in the first place.

Who is in the know about this?
If this was the case that the ECAP decision would still not stand, it would be ridiculous.
The page on the ECAP website does not say.
P.

Mr_Man

Having looked through the legislation it is not clear whether the outcome of an appeal can be taken to the courts. However the following comment from a recent SBP article on the regulators would suggest that the decision of the ECAP is not final:

Legal entanglements

Although the European Commission backed ComReg's joint dominance ruling, O2 and Vodafone have taken the issue to the National Appeals Panel. If the panel finds in favour of the regulator, it is likely that mobile giants will opt to string out the issue through the courts.

M

Solair

Just comes down to sloppy legislation!

I almost feel sorry for ComReg.

If this were soccer, the world cup final would take several years as each time the referee blew his whistle there would be a long drawn out battle at a FIFA tribunal.

Some has to give ComReg some legislative support and some teeth! How can anyone regulate an industry if they've no power or authority to do so?

eircomtribunal

Solair wrote:

Some has to give ComReg some legislative support and some teeth! How can anyone regulate an industry if they've no power or authority to do so?

Being strongly critical of ComReg, especially because of their damaging, systemic misinformation agenda, I'd agree they are victims as much as they are cause of the general failure: Without teeth it is only natural to discard of the backbone; that's almost like the psychological self-defence mechanism in individuals.

With regards to the Regulatory Framework I found this differing view on the issue. It makes perfect sense to me and I don't understand how this court decision came about?

The Framework Regulations provide for the establishment of an Appeals Panel to whom any user or undertaking that is affected by any decision of ComReg may appeal. They also set out the steps to be taken and the time limit within which any such appeal must be taken.

The Appeal Panel will have the power to compel the attendance of witnesses, to examine witnesses under oath and to compel the production of documents. Any decision of ComReg will stand until such time as the Appeal Panel overturns it.

P.

lucernarian

That's an interesting snippet of information. I would assume though that the court had considered this though. Also, I believe that the appeals panel wasn't fully set up at that stage 5 months ago.

Solair

It's sloppy legislation vs. a company with an army of the highest payed lawyers it can get its hands on.

Irish legislation's often woefully full of loopholes and weakspots it's by no means unique to the telecommunications sector!

The nature of the legal system is that it will automatically look for the weak points in any act of the oireachtas. There's no question of wheather the decision is in the greater good, it's just a dispassionate argument about legal technicalities. The result of which is that eircom will delay LLU again.

I'm not 100% sure of the technicalities, but it does sound like implementing an automatated local loop unbundling system would place a very heavy burden on eircom (financially).

ComReg need to look at some kind of a mechanism that provides decent compeditive access to local loops without burdening eircom with huge costs in rolling that sollution out. Their network wasn't designed to have unbundled local loops, so it will probabally require signifigant amounts of work to make an automated system possible.

Perhaps they should look at installing equipment at exchanges that would be owned / manged by a company controlled by comreg but owned and paid for by the other telcos who are interested in accessing the local loop directly. LLU Ltd or something. It could handle all of the administration / technicalities of these requests for unbundled lines. It would also mean that eircom would only have one authorised entity "fiddling with" it's exchanges which would greatly simplify things.

A sort of a common unbundling platform. It could be held in common ownership, something along the lines of the INEX (Internet Neutral EXchange) that interconnects the various ISPs in Ireland.

So, if you requested an unbundled line, LLU Ltd could do all of the technical work and you, as the other telco, would connecto to LLU Ltd's equipment and not directly to eircom's distribution frames.

I think part of the problem is that ComReg implements regulations in this area without thinking the practicalities of them through.

I'm no fan of eircom, don't get me wrong here, I can just see why they would be unwilling to spend money upgrading exchanges and on administration systems simply to allow other operators in.

If LLU signifigantly impacted on eircom's costs, you could see how they would be doing everything to prevent it going ahead.

I'm not for a moment trying to say that eircom shouldn't be made to open up their network. I'm just saying that perhaps there are far better ways of doing it in a more creative, efficient and less painful way.

Any measures to increase competition in the market should be fair, if there are any increased costs to bare, they should be distributed evenly amongst all of the players.

paulm17781

Solair wrote:

Perhaps they should look at installing equipment at exchanges that would be owned / manged by a company controlled by comreg but owned and paid for by the other telcos who are interested in accessing the local loop directly. LLU Ltd or something. It could handle all of the administration / technicalities of these requests for unbundled lines. It would also mean that eircom would only have one authorised entity "fiddling with" it's exchanges which would greatly simplify things.

That is a very good idea... If only Comreg were this inciteful.

SeaSide

Solair wrote:

Their network wasn't designed to have unbundled local loops, so it will probabally require signifigant amounts of work to make an automated system possible.

Could this have been deliberate?

Every telco in Europe and as far as I know the US is required by law to provide access to the local loop.

Break eircom in two and you may get the result you seek

damien

paulm17781 wrote:

That is a very good idea... If only Comreg were this inciteful.

I don't think this is within ComReg's terms of reference. BTW, this LLU Ltd, sounds a bit like E-Net in a way.

I don't think those telcos that want to do LLu would go for that as they'd all have various ideas on what kind of equipment to use and what kind of components to add. However this would be a really good idea for all the exchanges eircom are not willing to upgrade. Intall the equipment, connect the exchange to a MAN, plug into a resellers network at various points. It's just bitstream then but eircom free bitstream.

dahamsta

paulm17781 wrote:

If only Comreg were this inciteful.

Most accurate typo I've seen in a while.

Solair

This is a typical unbundling setup:
(In this case, France Telecom.. oddly enough they use the same switches as eircom)



What I would propose is that LLU Ltd would manage the whole process of disconnecting the line from the eircom exchange and patching it over to the other operator's equipment.

eircom's unwilling to do it at a reasonable cost.

So, what I'm suggesting is that the other operators pool their engineering resources, with the approval of eircom (forced through ComReg/Legislation if necessary) this new entity would have a team of engineers and an IT system dedicated to Local Loop Unbundling.

They would have access to the exchanges' distribution frames & to the other operator's equipment and would do the cutting over.

The same entity would manage and control plant rooms / external facilities to house other operators gear.

i.e. a room within the eircom building or a building located outside which would have Air conditioning, power supplies and UPS facilities, access to the local MAN and other fiber infrastructure and a mast on the roof for access to microwave links etc.

This building would be available to any other operator, provided they made their contribution to the company that operates it.

LLU can't really be automated per se, unlike carrier preselect which is entirely handled software installed on the switch, LLU requires a physical tie lines to be provided between eircom's distribution frames and the other operator. So, perhaps this might be a way around relying 100% on eircom to do it?

---

It would also mean that LLU could be done in a co-operative way in smaller exchanges. e.g. you might have a number of companies sharing a single pooled MSAN node.

And again, as Damien suggested, it might also lead to an alternative non-eircom source of DSL in exchanges that they haven't bothered to upgrade yet.


For those of you who have never seen one:



That's a relatively small distribution frame for a telephone exchange.

LLU involves connecting a pair of cables from there to another operator's distirbution frame and onto their voice switching or DSL equipment.

Not as neat and tidy as you might think and also explains why you occasionally get crosstalk if it goes horribly wrong.

Blaster99

Eircom gets paid very good money for unbundled lines, so they have very little to complain about. If LLU works in other countries at half the money, there's no reason why it wouldn't work here.

paulm17781

Blaster99 wrote:

Eircom gets paid very good money for unbundled lines, so they have very little to complain about. If LLU works in other countries at half the money, there's no reason why it wouldn't work here.

I believe that they are saying setting up an automated process would be expensive which does make you wonder why they should have to pay to reduce their own revenues.

That is why I like Solair's idea so much.

eircomtribunal

Blaster99 wrote:

Eircom gets paid very good money for unbundled lines, so they have very little to complain about. If LLU works in other countries at half the money, there's no reason why it wouldn't work here.

Eircom is deliberately hindering the process. ComReg is incapable of dealing with the issue in the appropriate way. The EU Commission might have to intervene again, as they did back in 2002 when they threatened court action against the ODTR (name-changed to ComReg since) for failing to regulate for LLU.
"The introduction of LLU was scheduled for April 2001 but by the end of the year none of the nation’s alternative operators
had installed co-location facilities in any eircom exchanges. In March 2002 the European Commission (EC) announced plans to
launch legal proceedings against the ODTR for failing to fully implement LLU legislation and ensure that new entrants are able
to gain fair access to the ‘last-mile’ infrastructure into subscriber homes. Officials at eircom, however, were quick to jump to
the ODTR’s defence, pointing to a January 2002 LLU consultation carried out by the ODTR which showed that there was no
interest from the nation’s alternative telecoms operators in taking the service. eircom executives also observed that the
company’s local loop had been unbundled for 15 months, but that no one had requested access to its unbundled local
exchanges during that time." From this pdf
P.

eircomtribunal

Enn reports about an IT article/interview with ECAP

New telco panel set to hand down rulings
According to a report in the Irish Times on Tuesday, the Electronic Communications Appeals Panel (Ecap) will rule on appeals lodged by Vodafone, O2, Three and Eircom over the next few months. All of the appeals deal with earlier decisions by communications regulator ComReg -- a body that Ecap has the power to overrule following its establishment in 2004....

P.

Blaster99

paulm17781 wrote:

I believe that they are saying setting up an automated process would be expensive which does make you wonder why they should have to pay to reduce their own revenues.

That is why I like Solair's idea so much.

It's very simple really. Ignore completely what Eircom says and look at international precedence. If it works in other countries, it will work here too regardless of Eircom's excuses. Eircom is forced to do LLU so an automated process would be in their interest as they can process the orders more efficiently. Solair's idea is good but it's not really necessary to complicate this stuff.

paulm17781

Blaster99 wrote:

It's very simple really. Ignore completely what Eircom says and look at international precedence. If it works in other countries, it will work here too regardless of Eircom's excuses. Eircom is forced to do LLU so an automated process would be in their interest as they can process the orders more efficiently. Solair's idea is good but it's not really necessary to complicate this stuff.

Would you run a business where you have to spend money to help your competitors?

Blaster99

That's an irrelevant question in this context. Eircom has to do LLU whether they want to or not or whether their competitors make money on it or not. Given that, it makes sense for Eircom to implement a system that allows them to make as much money as possible on LLU. They would do this by dealing with it as efficiently as possible.

paulm17781

Blaster99 wrote:

That's an irrelevant question in this context. Eircom has to do LLU whether they want to or not or whether their competitors make money on it or not. Given that, it makes sense for Eircom to implement a system that allows them to make as much money as possible on LLU. They would do this by dealing with it as efficiently as possible.

They are making more by keeping customers than they would from LLU. Keeping LLU slow moving for other customers is good business for Eircom. Sadly fair rarely applies to us customers.

Tom Young

Blaster99 wrote:

It's very simple really. Ignore completely what Eircom says and look at international precedence. If it works in other countries, it will work here too regardless of Eircom's excuses. Eircom is forced to do LLU so an automated process would be in their interest as they can process the orders more efficiently. Solair's idea is good but it's not really necessary to complicate this stuff.

Last Friday's victory for eircom highlights a number of issues:

1. ComReg are powerless to issue new directions with out leave to appeal of 28 days, plus 4 months as is stated as the time to hear an ECAP appeal.

2. ComReg only has powers over existing measures and enforcing same.

3. ComReg can either stick with the Lamborghini style directions or withdraw same. In favour of something more palateable.

4. The access regulations, while transposed properly may prove flawed.

5. Competition Acts may need to be brought over to effect ComReg's clout in enforcement of dominance, unlikely to happen.

6. The nation is unlikely to see motion on LLU in less that six months from now.

7. The Minister should have convened the appeal panel for reference awaiting outcome of judicial review.

Friday was a moral and principled victory for eircom. It effects very little in the context of business/consumer operations. What it does solidify is ComReg's issue with regulation ex ante (Latin work applied as during lifecycle).

Ex Post (Latin word for after the point/fact) competition law reviews are protracted and unwieldy. We may find ourselfs as a nation stuck with them. The EU Framework was designed to foster Ex Ante approaches to utilities.

ComReg's other options:

A. Appeal judgement (unlikely)
B. Seek changes to legislation/s (Untimely)
C. Withdraw directions in part / retain SMP - Significant Market Power status.

So SNFAU - Situaiton Normal All Fouled Up. :rolleyes:

Re: Quote. EU Precedent means nothing at the moment with regard to the position of industry and constitutional rights. While your point is a nice to have it's unrealistic.

Justice McKechnie was in rather a hurry to delivery this judgement last Friday, so perhaps I have missed something.


Tom

Solair

I just think that eircom will continiously come up with hurdles for LLU so the only way forward is to simply bypass eircom and, if you pardon the pun, take them out of the loop completely.

Also, given Ireland's demographics it might be a way towards making full scale LLU in all areas economically viable if operators could have a framework for sharing infrastructure rather than all duplicating and triplicating equipment in tiny exchanges and being forever beholden to eircom's bullying tactics.

It would mean that a new operator could simply come along to this new entity, without ever approaching eircom at all. Have their equipment installed and connected to the network without any eircom involvement at all.

I honestly don't think either ComReg or the Government is capable of regulating eircom into submission. We've also got a rather different legal framework to many other european countries, so every regulation is open to legal challenge it's just a fact of life! Look at any infrastructural project, planning decisions, etc etc .. it's the same endless farce! There's no question of looking at the greater good.

Tom Young

Maybe but there are question's of replication and then also investment. Question, do you propose some type of compelled handover of copper pairs?

There's been talk of various things ultimately the monopoly remains.

Wait to see what UPC/UGC do with cable.