[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	United Kingdom Competition Appeals Tribunal
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Competition Appeals Tribunal >> VIP Communications Ltd v Office of Communications [2006] CAT 27 (01 November 2006) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/CAT/2006/27.html Cite as: [2006] CAT 27

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

Neutral Citation: [2006] CAT 27

IN THE COMPETITION Case No. 1027/2/3/04

APPEAL TRIBUNAL

Victoria House,

Bloomsbury Place,

London WC1A 2EB

1 November 2006

Before: MARION SIMMONS QC (Chairman) Sitting as a Tribunal in England and Wales

BETWEEN:

VIP COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED Appellant

(in administration) - v -

OFFICE OF COMMUNICATIONS Respondent

Supported by

T-MOBILE (UK) LIMITED Intervener

_________ Transcribed from the Shorthand notes of Beverley F. Nunnery & Co. Official Shorthand Writers and Tape Transcribers Quality House, Quality Court, Chancery Lane, London WC2A 1HP Tel: 020 7831 5627 Fax: 020 7831 7737 _________

Mr. Brian Kennelly (instructed by Bankside) appeared for the Applicant.

Miss Anneli Howard (instructed by the Director of Telecommunications and Competition Law, Office of Communications) appeared for the Respondent.

Mr. Meredith Pickford (instructed by Miss Robyn Durie, Regulatory Counsel, T-Mobile) appeared on behalf of the Intervener.

_____________________ RULING: Costs _____________________
 


THE CHAIRMAN:

1. I order that the reasonable costs thrown away by the provision of the document which was headed "Re-amended Notice of Appeal" and dated 23^rd October 2006 be paid by the Appellant to OFCOM. Pursuant to Rule 55(3) of the Competition Appeal Tribunal Rules 2003 (SI 2003/1372), the amount to be paid be subject to detailed assessment by the Tribunal in the absence of agreement.
2. I do not order that the Appellant pay any of T-Mobile's costs. T-Mobile is an Intervener. It decided that it was in its interests to come here today. It has not added anything to Ofcom, who could quite appropriately have dealt with it today, and in fact did deal with it appropriately. In those circumstances there is nothing exceptional in this case which requires the Appellant to pay the Intervener's costs.
__