Jim Cheetham wrote:
Robert Fisher wrote:

I give up. I cannot understand how they can come to this conclusion from the facts I sent them.


Then ask them :-)

Good idea. It is probably worth reading the actual Commerce Act (its probably available online somewhere) and quoting the section that Telecom violated back to the Commerce Commission.


[quick google]

The Commerce Act summary (http://www.comcom.govt.nz/TheLegislation/Overview.aspx) certainly sounds like Telecom are in the poo: "The aim of the Commerce Act is to promote competition in markets within New Zealand".

The Commerce Act 1986 is here: http://rangi.knowledge-basket.co.nz/gpacts/public/text/1986/an/005.html

But note, there are a large number of amendment acts.

I think the bit you want is section 41, paragraph (a), subparagraph (ii):
  (a) The supply of goods shall be deemed to be prevented if---
           (i) The supply of those goods is refused except on terms that
         are disadvantageous to the person acquiring the goods; or
           (ii) The supply of those goods is on terms which are less
         favourable, whether in respect of time, method, or place of
         delivery, or otherwise, than the person who supplies the goods
         treats other persons to whom the same or similar goods are
         supplied:

Whether hooking ADSL up to your home counts as "goods", I'm not sure. If it does, I think you've got (the start of) a good case.

But...
I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV.

Cheers,
Carl.

Reply via email to