Rogers backs Telus in Wireless Review decision challenge

Rogers Communications Inc. has voiced its support for Telus Corp.'s Federal Court of Appeal challenge of certain elements of April's CRTC decision, in which Telus challenged provisions of the regulator's decision mandating seamless roaming between carriers and access to public infrastructure. In a memorandum of fact and law filed with the Federal Court of Appeal last Thursday, Rogers encouraged the court to grant Telus' application for leave to appeal, arguing that the CRTC made errors in law and jurisdiction in finding that it doesn’t have jurisdiction to adjudicate disputes between companies and municipalities related to mobile wireless transmission infrastructure, and that it did not need to create new policies and procedures to address such disputes. "The Commission’s determination on the Access Issue has a direct and unambiguous, negative impact on the deployment of modern telecommunications infrastructure in Canada," Rogers wrote to the court. "Telecommunications carriers rely on access to highways and other public places for the deployment of their telecommunications facilities. This access is particularly critical for wireless carriers at this juncture, as they seek to deploy transformative 5G wireless technology in Canada." In its April decision, the CRTC reasoned that it did not have the authority under the Telecommunications Act to regulate disputes around municipal rights of way, with the commission's logic turning on the definition of the term "transmission line" in the act. The CRTC argued that the wording does not include infrastructure needed for wireless infrastructure. Rogers -- agreeing with Telus' initial filing -- argues that the term does. "Having recognized that definitions of 'line' and 'transmission line' are varied and that the meaning of this term is unclear, it was incumbent on the Commission to consider the range of possible definitions of 'transmission line' and select a definition consistent with the context, objects and purpose of the regulatory scheme and the Act. The Commission failed to conduct this analysis," Rogers argued, adding that this failure constitutes an error in law and jurisdiction. When it comes to the CRTC's decision to mandate seamless roaming, Rogers also agrees with Telus' proposition that the licenses for spectrum that the companies purchased from the department of Innovation, Science, and Economic Development (ISED) does not require the companies to offer seamless roaming, and that therefore the CRTC's mandate that they do so interferes with ISED's jurisdiction. In its Thursday filing, Rogers quotes the language of ISED's 2013 conditions of spectrum license: "Roaming does not require communications hand-off between Home and Host Networks, such that there is no interruption of communications in progress." "The effect of the Decision is to amend this condition of licence, by striking the word “not”. The Commission has no authority to amend the conditions of licence established by the Minister," Rogers argued in the filing. — Reporting by Michael Lee-Murphy at mleemurphy@thewirereport.ca and editing by Hannah Daley at hdaley@thewirereport.ca

Rogers backs Telus in Wireless Review decision challenge

News | June 8, 2021

Unlock all the Canadian telecom, broadcasting and digital media news you need.

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us

Rogers backs Telus in Wireless Review decision challenge

News | June 8, 2021

Unlock all the Canadian telecom, broadcasting and digital media news you need.

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Related Stories

Telus’ arguments for incumbent access to wholesale regime not supported by competitors

CRTC finalizes terms of Uvagut TV distribution

Bell won’t participate in subsidized broadband projects if wholesale access for Big Three continues, signs agreement with CNOC

CRTC announces changes to Broadband Fund

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us