A legal challenge by Eircom to a decision by the Director of Telecommunications Regulations on how the company should make its interconnector network available to other operators is adversely affecting the operations of Esat Telecom and Ocean Communications, the High Court heard yesterday.
On September 6th, the director, Ms Etain Doyle, laid down 32 directions on how Eircom should comply with European Commission regulations in regard to making its interconnector network available and directed Eircom to republish its Reference Interconnector Order (RIO) by October 22nd last.
Other telecommunications companies had made frequent complaints about the manner in which Eircom made its network available. Many of the director's decisions are of benefit to Esat, Ocean and other telecommunications companies.
Eircom's challenge to Ms Doyle's decision has meant the company has yet to issue its revised RIO. Mr Justice McCracken was told the director had also refrained from deciding other complaints regarding Eircom pending the outcome of the legal proceedings.
Counsel for Esat and Ocean told the judge yesterday they were anxious Eircom's challenge was heard speedily. Ms Niamh Hyland, for Esat, asked the judge to join her client as a notice party or defendant to Eircom's action while Mr Eoin McCullough, for Ocean, asked that his views be heard on a preliminary issue regarding the nature and scope of Eircom's appeal.
Mr Peter Charleton SC, for Eircom, opposed the applications while Mr Michael Cush SC, for the director, said his client was neutral. However, the director believed if the parties were joined to the proceedings, they should be on their own risk regarding legal costs.
The director has also brought a motion asking the court to issue directions on the nature and scope of the appeal hearing. The parameters of the appeal are strongly in dispute between Eircom and the director.
After hearing submissions from all the parties yesterday, Mr Justice McCracken said the director's motion would go into next month's court list to fix dates with a view to getting an early date for hearing. The judge said the matter was urgent.
He would, at this point, refuse the applications by both Esat and Ocean to be heard in the proceedings regarding the scope of the appeal. However, Esat and Ocean had liberty to renew their applications to be heard once the scope of the appeal was decided.
