Home -> Law Blog Directory -> International Law Blogs -> Freedom to Differ
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
International Law
: Freedom to DifferTelstra loses court challenge to ACCC
The High Court today handed down a rare unanimous joint judgment dismissing Telstra's constitutional challenge to the ACCC. Read the judgment here. This is how The Australian summarised the decision:
THE High Court of Australia today threw out Telstra's constitutional challenge against the competition watchdog's powers to set prices for access to its networks by rivals.
Telstra launched the challenge in January 2007, after the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission ruled that the telco should give its rivals access to certain parts of its network for $3.20 a month.
"The telecommunications access regime set out in the Trade Practices Act did not amount to an acquisition of Telstra's property," the High Court said in its judgment.
The decision was unanimous and the court ordered Telstra to pay costs.
Shares in Telstra fell 1.3 per cent to $4.49 in early trade, as the benchmark S&P/ASX200 index gained 0.5 per cent.
Telstra had claimed that the ACCC's actions force it to give rivals access to its network, which it believed breached the Constitution.
The Constitution prevents the Government from taking property without providing "just" compensation.
"The rights in Telstra's assets were rights to use the assets in connection with the provision of telecommunications services, but those rights were always subject to a statutory access scheme which permitted other carriers to use the assets," the court said.
"Telstra had always owned and operated the assets within a regulatory regime by which other carriers have the right to connect their facilities to Telstra's network and to obtain access to Telstra services."
The challenge required the court to rule that the Trade Practices Act was in breach of the Constitution because it gave the ACCC price-setting powers.
Read more here.
Full post as published by Freedom to Differ on March 06, 2008 (boomark / email).
Selection of State Supreme Court Judges
How State Court Judges are Selected
Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Career Choices
Descriptions of law enforcement occupations
California Supreme Court Proposition 8 Decision
Court Rejects Challenges to Proposition 8, but Finds Marriages Valid
Is Barack Obama a Natural Born Citizen?
Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz (Supreme Court): Does Obama meet the constitutional requirements to be President
Heart of Atlanta v United States
Supreme Court Decision: Civil Rights Act Protected by Interstate Commerce Clause
Unwed Fathers' Rights in Adoption
Landmark Cases in Adoption Law Shape Law with respect to Unwed Fathers
Social Security Loses Class Action, Will Pay $500 Million in Benefits
Social Security Loses Class Action, Will Pay $500 Million in Benefits
Philip Morris
Loses Appeal, Will Pay Millions
$5.5 MIllion Settlement
Landlord loses Class Action
Ebay Fined
French Court Sets Fine at $61 Million
Personal Injury
Appeals Court Upholds Congressional Legislation
Tomato Salmonella
Sheetz Convenience Stores agrees to confidential out-of-court settlement with food poisoning victim.









