Monday, August 11, 2008
Key money is alive and well

At issue was Shaw's inability to reach a building access agreement during the construction phase with Concord Pacific, the property developer. Shaw argued that Novus, a facilities-based service provider related to the developer, had received undue preference in gaining access to the buildings.
Interestingly, TELUS indicated that it was able to secure access to the site, although the record indicates that Novus does not yet offer competing local phone service.
The Commission found that merely receiving a benefit from undue preference is not a violation of the Telecom Act:
Based on the record of this proceeding, the Commission finds that even if Novus has benefited from an undue preference given to it by Concord, Novus did not act in violation of subsection 27(2) of the Act by merely receiving such benefit.Contrast the Commission's findings with what it said last year, in a decision coincidentally numbered 2007-69.
Technorati Tags:
CRTC, Shaw, Novus