Infrastructure

Home page

Infrastructure

Azercell Telekom issues statement on lawsuit with Bakcell

13 February 2013 16:35 (UTC +04:00)

Baku. Nijat Mustafayev – APA-Economics. Azercell Telekom has issued a statement on the lawsuit with Bakcell.

According to Azercell, only one mobile operator, which offered high prices and tariffs to the subscribers, operated in Azerbaijan before Azercell and after Azercell’s operation the prices decreased.

Concretely, regarding court’s decision, we note that Bakcell demanded to change through the court the contract signed with mutual will of the sides. Consequently, on the basis of acts signed in accordance with that contract, Bakcell has filed a lawsuit to get back AZN 15 mln of the money which it paid to Azercell during 2 years (2009-2011). The lawsuit is based on interconnection tariff defined according to the interconnection rule affirmed by the order of Ministry of Communication and Information Technologies dated 03.04.2009.

Company says the Tariff (Price) Council determines the tariffs. The prices regulated by government were reflected in the “List of goods (services, works) of which prices are determined by Government”. Although, the interconnection tariffs were not reflected in that list and only Tariff Council can determine the tariffs, MCIT determined the interconnection tariffs. This is contradicts the liabilities assumed under the contract signed by Azercell with the government on privatization of its state share in authorized fund: “These reasons made us protest that tariff”.

Moreover, a 20-year investment contract was signed on establishment of Azercell in 1996. According to the law on “Investment activity”, if the later legislation worsens the investment environment, the legislation, which was valid during investing, is applied: “Even, if the tariffs adopted by MCIT were legal, because the government did not regulate the tariffs before, it can not be applied to Azercell“.

According to Civil Code, if a different law was adopted after the contract is signed, the terms of the contract remain valid. Only those cases are excluded that if its force concerns the previously concluded contracts.

At the same time, according to Civil Code, if other rule has not been determined in relation to the Code or by the agreement of the sides, the sides can not demand the return of commitment until the contract is changed or canceled: ‘Despite all the irrefutable legal norms and principles reflected in our protests, appeal and cassation complaints that we submitted to the courts, Baku Administrative Economic Court #1 made a decision totally providing Bakcell’s claim. Baku Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court kept that resolution without any change. We intend to take relevant steps in direction of deletion of judicial decisions adopted on this case by using the rights given by the international contracts, which our state joined’.