In July 2020, Free approached the Arcep, asking it to specify the conditions of access for market players to SFR's FttH network in less dense private initiative zones (AMII). Iliad's subsidiary demanded that SFR's tariffs for access to the terminal part of its network be regulated, limiting any increase to the indexation provided for in the mutualization contract between the two operators and making any change beyond this scale subject to the signature of a rider "negotiated in good faith".

This is a hot topic, because already last April, the Arcep said it was ready to put the "points on the i's" in the issue of the increase in connection rates to SFR's fiber network in private areas. In fact, the Authority had already demanded from the mark with the red square the cancellation of the increase in its tariffs in force since the beginning of the year 2020 after having been seized by Bouygues Telecom last winter.

Free, which therefore demanded the revision of the co-financing rates demanded by SFR, in the AMII zone, so that they do not exceed €5.12 per line and per month (or €513.6 per line for the non-recurring rate) for a co-financing up to 20%.

This request was accepted by Arcep, which asked SFR to adjust its tariffs in the AMII zones but also in the AMEL zones. The Gendarme des Télécoms justifies this position by stating that SFR's infrastructure branch "has not produced any specific elements that would allow it to understand its costs" and believes that increases in access tariffs must "be justified by cost elements".

As in the dispute between Bouygues Telecom and SFR, the Arcep has enjoined the brand with the red square to return to its co-financing rates applied before February 2020. However, it has the possibility of adjusting them in a much more modest manner by means of an amendment. This decision was eagerly awaited by certain players in the sector, for whom the survival of the principle of sharing the terminal part of the Orange and SFR fiber networks, in force since 2008, was at stake.

 Read the article

Source : ZDNet

Free had been involved for several years in co-financing the FTTH networks deployed by Orange and was challenging several terms of its contract with the incumbent operator. The Regulatory Authority had settled this dispute in Free's favour, but Orange had been challenging the legality of the dispute since then. The Paris Court of Appeal upheld Arcep's decision in an order dated 26th September 2019.

The planned renewal of the term and conditions of access to Orange's infrastructure was contested by Free. Arcep confirmed that they did not meet Free's needs for visibility and transparency and therefore imposed on Orange to grant a right of access for a defined period of time and at least 40 years. In its decision, the Court of Appeal confirmed that these conditions are "not sufficiently precise in view of Free's need for visibility over the effective duration of this right".

In addition, Arcep considered that it was justified and reasonable for Free to obtain information on the formation of access tariffs for Orange FTTH networks in less dense private initiative areas. This was also supported by the Court of Appeal, which stated that these tariffs were "directly linked to the financial terms of the bid, which it seeks to ensure is fair".

Finally, the Regulatory Authority considered that the incumbent operator should allow Free to connect mobile base stations in less dense areas of private initiative via the extra optical fibres of the FTTH network deployed by Orange and co-financed by Free. A point that has not been contested by Orange in its appeal.

In addition, the Paris Court of Appeal held that the decision did not affect business confidentiality and confirmed Arcep's analysis. And noting that the information that Orange must provide to Free pursuant to the decision "is characterized by a very high degree of aggregation, both geographically and by expense items".

 Read the article

Source : Le Monde Informatique