Act/Law wise: Judgment of Supreme Court of Bangladesh

ALL A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z



Bangladesh Telecommunication Act, 2001
Section/Order/Article/Rule/Regulation Head Note
Section 29 with Sections 30(2)(m) and 37(3)(g)

read with Telegraph Act, 1885 (Act No. XIII of 1885) Section - 7 read with Wireless Telegraphy Act, 1933 (Act No. XVII of 1933) Section - 10(2) read with National Telecommunication Policy, 1998 read with Contract Act, 1872 (Act No. IX of 1872); Section-23: Whether the 'exclusivity' clause in the licence agreement was void as it gave the petitioner monopoly in the trade which is unenforceable being illegal and against public policy.
The Bangladesh Telecommunication Act, 2001 was given effect from 8.7.2001 and hence forth it is the duty and obligation of the Commission to enter into any licence agreement but in spite of that prior to constitution of the Commission the parties (MOPT and the World Tel. Bangladesh Limited) have singed the agreement in hot haste on 12.7.2001 containing terms including the 'exclusivity' clause at a time when the Act was already in force, which the learned Consul for the respondent termed to be the result of coercive mode of procurement in singing of the licence agreement. - the Commission could amend any license agreement executed by the Government either under Telegraph Act, 1885 or Wireless Telegraphy Act, 1933 by invoking the provisions of section 89 and 90 of the B.T. Act if it considers that any condition or content in the license agreement is inconsistent with any provisions of the Act in order to ensure healthy competitive environment, prohibition of anti-competitive and discriminatory practices in the telecom sector and to meet the huge unmet demand for telephone to the tune of 07 millions in the DME area and in the overall public interest. -as the term regarding 'exclusivity' was contrary to the aforesaid provisions of law and the spirits and object of the 'National Telecommunication Policy', the condition in the Agreement is opposed to public policy and therefore void. World Tel Bangladesh Ltd. Vs. Bangladesh & Ors 20 BLT (AD) 108. ....View Full Judgment

Section 46

read with
বাংলাদেশ টেলিভিশনের জন্য টেরিস্ট্রিয়াল টেলিভিশন সম্প্রচার সুবিধা সংরক্ষন অধ্যাদেশ, ২০০৬ and
বাংলাদেশ টেলিভিশনের জন্য টেরিস্ট্রিয়াল টেলিভিশন সম্প্রচার সুবিধা সংরক্ষন আইন, ২০০৯
Stop broadcasting activities of Jamuna Television– There is no illegality in the order dated 19.11.2009 to stop test transmission of the appellant-company's Television Channel cancelling the allocated satellite frequency and using of earth station, SNA and DSNA machineries and equipments and seizing the machineries and equipments under the seizure list dated 19.11.2009. However, in view of the observations and findings made hereinabove, the appeal is allowed-in-part in doing complete justice, the respondents are hereby directed to release the machineries and equipments seized from the appellant-company’s TV stations as per seizure list dated 19.11.2009 (Annexure-A2) and to dispose of the appellants’ application dated 08.10.2009 in accordance with law within 1(one) month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. At this stage the appellants are not entitled to broadcast or transmit any telecommunication without having obtained requisite licences and NOC in accordance with law from the concerned Ministries and authorities. …Jamuna Television Ltd. =VS= Government of Bangladesh, (Civil), 2020 (1) [8 LM (AD) 183] ....View Full Judgment