The telecommunications regulator, Ms Etain Doyle, was last night considering what steps to take following a High Court ruling criticised the way her office ran the competition for the third mobile phone licence.
In the judgment, details of which were made available yesterday, Ms Justice Macken said draft reports from those evaluating bids for the licence were altered to generate a result which could "readily be perceived to be biased" in favour of the US-Irish consortium Meteor and against the British firm Orange.
Ms Doyle had awarded the licence to Meteor after considering bids from the two groups.
In its initial reaction to the judgment late on Monday, the Office of the Director of Telecommunications Regulation (ODTR) said it intended to appeal the case to the Supreme Court. Yesterday sources said Ms Doyle would take a few days to consider the 247-page ruling, then decide whether to appeal.
Ms Justice Macken said several draft versions of important documents had been altered. "It seems to me clear that the effect of these alterations is to generate a result which can readily be perceived to be biased in favour of Meteor and against Orange."
Some of the changes were intended to modify the otherwise very harsh meaning attaching to many of the phrases used by the drafters. The changes were not made in accordance with the tender process, she added.
Orange yesterday welcomed the decision, while Meteor said it was disappointed.
The dispute means Irish mobile phone users must wait until at least next summer for more competition in the market. In commercial terms it also devalues the licence; some one million people in the State already have a mobile phone and a new entrant would have to wrest these away from Eircell and Digifone.
Legal sources said last night the ODTR was likely to appeal but warned that, as there were no spaces available in the Supreme Court calendar term, such a move would immediately tie up the process for at least four months.
However, not appealing the decision would leave the ODTR having to weave a very careful path.
To comply with the court ruling, Ms Doyle must reconsider the two applications for the licence. It could be argued that she must evaluate only these bids, purely on the same basis as the first time.
However, the bids are now more than 1 1/2 years old and in the fast-moving telecommunications industry, they are sure to be out of date.
If the ODTR was to interpret the court ruling as reopening the decision-making process, Ms Doyle could ask the two contenders for new documents.
She could also invite fresh applications, yet such a move could be open to legal challenges from Orange and Meteor.