Telstra pleads The Castle defence

commentary Have Telstra boss Sol Trujillo and his amigos been taking a crash course in Australian cinematic classics?

Renai LeMay, ZDNet Australia It certainly appears so, as Telstra took its case against the competition regulator to the nation's High Court today, using the exact same argument for just compensation that Darryl Kerrigan did in the 1997 film The Castle.

That is, clause 51 (xxxi) of the Australian Constitution.

Now while the film is a local favourite due to its masterful use of ocker humour, don't expect to see Telstra's chief legal eagle Will Irving up in court claiming "It's Mabo, it's the Constitution, it's the vibe".

He's more likely to be using technical phrases such as "unbundled local loop", "line sharing services", and "declared services".

The end result of Telstra's appeal is also likely to be different.

While Darryl Kerrigan won his case in The Castle, both the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) and the Australian Competition Tribunal have already given Telstra's wholesale pricing proposals short shrift.

In addition, the federal Government has consistently indicated its support for the competition regulator's Telstra constrictions.

It would be a brave High Court that would overturn these authorities and shake up the local telecommunications industry with a pro-Telstra decision. (Of course your writer makes no claim to any legal qualifications or specialist legal knowledge in this case.)

Now of course just like Darryl Kerrigan, Telstra doesn't actually have much capital invested in its High Court challenge -- around AU$1 million in legal costs.

As Telstra's public policy and communications chief Phil Burgess said this morning, this is "a tiny investment for big stakes".

However, the telco's relatively cheap legal move will have another effect -- causing some industry uncertainty about the likely outcome of the case.

This will make long-term planning slightly more difficult for Telstra's competitors and go some way towards maintaining the status quo -- which may be just what Telstra desires.

Meanwhile, Telstra can, as Darryl Kerrigan would have put it, "enjoy the serenity".

What do you think about Telstra's High Court challenge? Fair enough or a step too far? Drop me a line directly at renai.lemay@zdnet.com.au or post your comments below this article.

Advertisement

Talkback 9 comments

    Past the line Anonymous -- 24/01/07

    Telstra are so far past the line, that they can't even see the line anymore, the line is a dot to Telstra.

    They will stall competitors, and make a truckload of money from this stunt though.

    One for the pool room Rod Bruem -- 24/01/07

    Good blog Renai. Of course what the Govt, ACCC or anyone else has said or ruled in the past is of no relevance when you go to the High Court and try to uphold the Constitution. I'm sure politicians, bureacrats and neighbours laughed off Eddie Mabo at some stage.

    High Court Sydney Lawrence -- 25/01/07 (in reply to #320073612)

    Renai, I am surprised at your aspersions that the High Court of Australia makes decisions based on the directions of the Australian Government. I am sure the Honourable Members of this Court would take issue also.

    Telstra's Challenge Anonymous -- 25/01/07

    In light of the stupid decision (my view) to vest the network of the day in other than a totally independant body (now ACMA), the holder of the network should be able to charge what it likes. If start-up carriers want to provide services, they should do just that! Either pay the asking price or build their own network!

    Both parties to blame? Mike Smith -- 25/01/07 (in reply to #320073650)

    The government of the day and the taxpayers are going to continue to pay for the original stupid decision to sell Telstra without splitting the infrastructure (read local loop) out of the sale.

    Fine - same for Telstra then!!!! Anonymous -- 25/01/07 (in reply to #320073650)

    OK - Perhaps Telstra should build IT'S own network at the same time. The current one belongs to the public - we paid for it!!!

    Sale Sydney Lawrence -- 25/01/07 (in reply to #320073654)

    True, but the Australian public bought it, remember, now the Shareholders own it, pretty simple really.

    Telstra - DISGUSTING! Anonymous -- 25/01/07

    So who owns Telstra's infrastructure then? US! WE paid for all these exchanges and "copper" as taxpayers and then paid again on top of that so Telstra could make $4 Billion a year. They can't even invest that profit back into infrastructure choosing instead to throw $2.2 billion of it away speculating on Singaporean Telcoms proving just what a bad steward they are of our cash anyway!!

    Thankyou Howard Govt. for making us pay a third time over to buy shares in something we already own and choosing such a poor management team to take it over...well done!!

    How it really works Anonymous -- 16/09/08

    Read here to figure out what its all about.
    http://erijustice.50webs.com/index.html

Add your opinion

Latest Videos

Sponsored content

Power Centre - Content from our premier sponsors

Blogs

  • Suzanne Tindal Sick of broken tender sites
    Some of the state governments desperately need to invest in more user-friendly tender sites so that looking for information on government tenders doesn't have to be a game of blind man's bluff.
  • Array Cyberwar: What is it good for?
    In this week's episode, Cyberwar. What is Australia's place in the world of digital warfare? What are the implications for the NBN?
  • Array Is wholesale-only backhaul just a pipedream?
    The potential acquisition of Pipe Networks by SP Telemedia has raised the question about whether vertically integrated backhaul providers will mean higher wholesale prices for ISP customers.
  • More blogs »

Tags

Back to top

Featured