ICASA welcomes Telkom losing appeal against leasing of its equipment

Hanno Labuschagne

Journalist
Staff member
Joined
Sep 2, 2019
Messages
2,489
ICASA welcomes Telkom losing appeal against leasing of its equipment

The Independent Communications Authority of South Africa (ICASA) has welcomed the ruling of the Supreme Court of Appeal against Telkom regarding the leasing of its facilities to network operators.

Telkom had sought to review a decision by ICASA to direct the operator to lease its ducts to Vodacom in some residential estates in the Western Cape.

This, the Authority had argued, was required in terms of section 43 of the Electronic Communications Act of 2005 (ECA).
 

TheRoDent

Cool Ideas Rep
Joined
Aug 6, 2003
Messages
5,678
Telkom.... Complaining about a difficult competitive environment on the one hand, and suing to try and maintain it's monopoly on the other hand.

Schizo much ?
 

Swa

Honorary Master
Joined
May 4, 2012
Messages
29,736
Wrong. The ruling goes both ways.
Yes but see the question. This doesn't apply to areas but estates under very specific conditions. Icasa has in any case never mandated facilities leasing.
 

SpiderGear

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2010
Messages
480
Yes but see the question. This doesn't apply to areas but estates under very specific conditions. Icasa has in any case never mandated facilities leasing.
So, if Vumatel has laid ducts and sleeves inside an estate the are now forced to lease it to any other provider?

Who determines the leasing costs? All they need to do is make is super expensive so it will be uneconomical to do.
 

r00igev@@r

Executive Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
7,419
Telkom.... Complaining about a difficult competitive environment on the one hand, and suing to try and maintain it's monopoly on the other hand.

Schizo much ?
It was Vodacom who sued so it was a duopoly against a monopoly...
 

Geoff.D

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
23,953
The answer is what it has always been. The owner of the property or BC should provide the ducts as standard and then make them available on a non exclusive basis and at no cost to any registered telecom service provider. Problem gone.
 

ponder

Honorary Master
Joined
Jan 22, 2005
Messages
88,715
Key to Tuchten’s judgement that Vodacom’s request was reasonable was that Telkom said it wanted to use this available space to install its own fibre cables.

“To my mind, once Telkom asserts that it wants to lay cabling where Vodacom wants to lay cabling, it admits, by implication, that what Vodacom wants to do is both technically and economically feasible and would promote the efficient use of networks and services,” said Tuchten.

“How can you argue that what your competitor wants to do is not technically and economically feasible and contributes to the efficient use of networks and services when you are planning to do the very same thing?”

So if telkom has space they plan to use for future expansion etc they must lease it to someone else and then there is no space left after another company is done telkom must now install new conduits at their own expense once again.

I fail to see the fairness in this.
 

Swa

Honorary Master
Joined
May 4, 2012
Messages
29,736
So, if Vumatel has laid ducts and sleeves inside an estate the are now forced to lease it to any other provider?

Who determines the leasing costs? All they need to do is make is super expensive so it will be uneconomical to do.
No. There was a dispute over who owned the ducts. That's why Telkom turned their argument to spoliage which was not a valid argument. I don't know the specifics and it may be buried in the ruling somewhere but the estate itself had a hand in laying the infrastructure.

So if telkom has space they plan to use for future expansion etc they must lease it to someone else and then there is no space left after another company is done telkom must now install new conduits at their own expense once again.

I fail to see the fairness in this.
The fairness lies in the fact that Telkom was using underhanded tactics to get exclusive use of a servitude that wasn't theirs and nobody else went for that argument. If they need more they can lay more infrastructure at their own cost.
 

r00igev@@r

Executive Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
7,419
I thought Telkom and Openserve were seperated and Openserve owns the infrastructure. So what would Telkom's role be in this?
 
Top