NO Optus

According to the Federal Court of Australia registry website for tomorrow, the ACCC versus SingTel Optus case has advanced to a directions hearing… whatever that is.

The quote is the quotey quote quotey quotey

9:30 AM Directions

3 (P)NSD776/2010 BRIDGETTE REBECCA STYLES v CLAYTON UTZ

4 (P)NSD1157/2010 AUSTRALIAN COMPETITION & CONSUMER COMMISSION v SINGTEL OPTUS PTY LIMITED

5 (P)NSD1343/2009 RODMAC HOLDINGS PTY LTD & ANOR v ROTRIC HOLDINGS PTY LTD & ORS

Come again?

According to the Glossary of the Legal Services Commision of Rigel 7 website, a so called directions hearing is:

A hearing of directions

While arguably accurate, this description is entirely pointless. According to the far more useful Glossary of the Legal Services Commision of South Australia website, a directions hearing is:

[…] held before the full hearing so that the court or tribunal can give directions to the parties about how the action should proceed.

So, have we made any progress determining whether or not Optus intentionally mislead consumers with their unlimited advertising that I spoke tongue in cheek about last week?

Link arms, don’t make them