Dan Warne16 May 2007, 5:25 AM
Telstra has lost a Federal Court case which tried to prevent competitor Optus from comparing its mobile plans with Telstra's. It is undeniable that a consumer would get better value under the Optus $49 Cap plan. Telstra cannot show to the contrary, said the judge.
A federal court judge has ruled that Optus' $49 capped mobile plan provides better value than Telstra's $40 mobile phone plan, as shown in a series of advertisements Optus has been running across newspapers, websites, billboards and TV.
Telstra had sued Optus, applying to the federal court for an urgent injunction to stop the telco comparing the two plans.
However, Justice Gray said “It is undeniable that a consumer would get better value under the Optus $49 Cap plan. Telstra cannot show to the contrary.”
Telstra's complaint hinged around the fact that Optus was comparing one of its capped mobile plans with one of Telstra's non-capped mobile plans.
"Instead of comparing apples with apples, SingtelOptus is instead trying to compare apples with avocadoes [sic], " a Telstra spokesman said in a published statement.
However, an Optus spokesperson said it was well aware of this and specifically made the comparison, because Telstra has focused the majority of its marketing on signing people up to non-capped plans.
“We have been successfully promoting our Cap plans for two years and over the same period Telstra has primarily encouraged its customers onto non cap plans," said Michael Smith, Marketing Chief of Optus Consumer.
Smith's view was supported by Justice Gray: “Optus is perfectly entitled to compare its $49 Cap plan with Telstra’s $40 phone plan."
“There is no suggestion that there is any untruth about the assertion that there would be greater value in the Optus Cap plan to a consumer who wants to make a lot of phone calls to anyone, anywhere in Australia.”
Prior to the unsuccessful court action, Telstra claimed, "the bottom-line is that SingtelOptus cannot compete with Telstra's Next G network on coverage, speed or overall value, so they have resorted to trickery in their advertising."
Instead of achieving the outcome it wanted, Telstra was ordered to pay costs to Optus for the hearing and its application for an injunction was dismissed, allowing Optus to continue the advertising campaign.
“We certainly weren’t surprised by Telstra’s attempts to squash an act of competition – it has just been another example of their monopolistic behaviour and lack of genuine concerns for their customers," said Smith.