Final Judgment

Neutral citation:

[2006] CAT 12


15 May 2006



Judgment on an appeal by Media Marketing Promotions (“MMP”) under section 192 of the Communications Act 2003 against the determination by OFCOM that: MMP was an electronic communications provider bound by General Condition 18; that it had contravened its obligation to provide “number portability” at the request of a subscriber, Prime Time Radio (“PTR”), and “portability” at the request of another communications provider, Uniworld Communications(“Uniworld”); and requiring MMP to provide number portability in respect of specified numbers as soon as reasonably practicable.

The Tribunal found that the principal feature of the service which MMP agreed to provide to PTR was to procure the routing of callers to PTR, which fell within the definition of an electronic communications service. The Tribunal further found on the basis of the natural meaning of the word “provide” and as a matter of statutory interpretation that MMP was providing an electronic communications service to PTR. Accordingly MMP was an electronic communications provider for the purposes of General Condition 18.

The Tribunal also found that, insofar as PTR had a contract with MMP for the supply of Publicly Available Telephone Services, it was a subscriber for the purposes of General Condition 18 and, ac cordingly, was entitled to request number portability from MMP.

The Tribunal held that OFCOM had been correct to find that MMP was required to provide number portability to PTR as soon as was reasonably practicable on reasonable terms and that MMP was obliged to provide portability to Uniworld.

This is an unofficial summary prepared by the Registry of the Competition Appeal Tribunal.