Skip to main content
This website uses cookies. By continuing to use this website you are agreeing to our use of cookies as described in our privacy policy.
Client Work

Reference re Broadcasting Regulatory Policy CRTC 2010 167 and Broadcasting Order CRTC 2010 168, 2012 SCC 68

Fasken
Reading Time 1 minute read Subscribe
In this decision, the Supreme Court of Canada found that the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (the “CRTC”) did not have the legal authority to create a “value for signal” regime. Under a “value for signal” regime, over-the-air broadcasters would have been able to charge cable and satellite companies for retransmitting their free signals. This decision will help prevent consumers’ cable and satellite subscription costs from increasing. Fasken Martineau was counsel to the successful Appellants Rogers Communications Inc. and TELUS Communications Company with a team that included Jay Kerr-Wilson and Ariel Thomas. Our Communications group handles cases involving the CRTC and other broadcasting regulatory bodies.

    Subscribe

    Receive email updates from our team

    Subscribe