Advocate Al-Hazzam told the Palestine Economy Portal that he is filing the lawsuit based on the first decision issued by the Cassation Court in favor of Advocate Al-Hroub, in addition to the basic law stating that “no fees can be charged without a legal text related thereof.”

Imad Rajabi – Palestine Economy Portal

Translated by Tamara Barakat

Advocate Wael Al-Hazzam (39 years old) filed a lawsuit against the Palestinian Telecommunication Group (Paltel) because of the monthly subscription fees it charges on the three telephone lines that he owns. Paltel charges 20 shekels on the first line and another 20 for the second and third lines that share one bill.

He told the Palestine Economy Portal that he is filing the lawsuit based on the first decision issued by the Cassation Court in favor of Advocate Ahmad Al-Hroub, in addition to the basic law stating that “no fees can be charged without a legal text related thereof.”

He added that the Court’s first decision was general and not particular, which means that the Court did not specify that it applies to one individual only, and this confirms the illegality of the fees.

He said that the hearing is scheduled on January 18, 2016.

This lawsuit follows a judgement issued by the Cassation Court in favor of Advocate Al-Hroub against the monthly fees charged by Paltel.

The Judge said, “The monthly fees charged by Paltel are not based on any of the valid laws in the Palestinian territories, and so, Paltel does not have right to charge and collect them.”

The Cassation Court is the highest court in the Palestinian judicial hierarchy and its decisions are binding on all of the courts below it.

Contract of Adhesion

Moreover, Advocate Hatem Shaheen told the Palestine Economy Portal that the Cassation Court’s decision is one hundred percent correct since it is issued by the Cassation Court whose decisions cannot be overruled in any way.

Although Paltel said in a statement that the subscription fees are considered quid pro quo between the company and the customer, in return for specific services, such as maintenance and connection to the network, Advocate Shaheen emphasizes that the concluded contract is called a “contract of adhesion.”

He added that this “adhesion” prevents the customers from negotiating with the company on the terms and conditions of the contract even if they had not approved of them due the monopoly enjoyed by the company. In this case, the court has the right to contest the contract.

Additionally, Advocate Al-Hazzam said that the contract concluded between Paltel and the customer, according to the Court’s statement, does not allow Paltel to collect monthly fees.

(Palestine Economy Portal)