Most Favoured Nation Status. [Delete clause 24.22 where End User is paying all Access Charges] (a) If the Operator believes on reasonable grounds that: (i) Aurizon Network has entered into an Access Agreement with another Railway Operator for a Train service that transports the same specified commodity in the same specified geographic area as a Train Service provided in accordance with this Agreement (“Like Train Service”); and (ii) the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s Access Undertaking, the Operator may provide written notification to Aurizon Network which must include the reasons why the Operator considers this to be the case. (b) Within thirty (30) days of receipt of such notification, Aurizon Network must advise the Operator: (i) whether or not Aurizon Network agrees that the Access Agreement with the other Railway Operator is for a Like Train Service and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon Network considers this to be the case; (ii) if Aurizon Network agrees that the Access Agreement with the other Railway Operator is for a Like Train Service, whether or not Aurizon Network agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s Access Undertaking and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon Network considers that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has not been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation; and (iii) if Aurizon Network agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation then within sixty (60) days of advice provided pursuant to Clause 24.22(b) Aurizon Network must advise the Operator: (A) whether or not Aurizon Network has been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s Access Undertaking; or (B) if Aurizon Network has not been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service that Aurizon Network agrees to the reduction of the Access Charge payable by the Operator including the amount of the proposed reduced Access Charge. (c) If the Operator does not agree with Aurizon Network’s response to its notification, the dispute shall be referred to an expert for resolution in accordance with Clause 18.3. (d) If: (i) another Railway Operator provides Aurizon Network with notification that it believes that some or all of the Operator’s Train Services are a Like Train Service to a Train service operated by the other Railway Operator, and that the Access Charge has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s Access Undertaking; and (ii) Aurizon Network agrees that this Agreement is for a Like Train Service and that any Access Charge under this Agreement has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s Access Undertaking, then Aurizon Network has the right by notice to the Operator to vary the Access Charge such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s Access Undertaking. Executed in Queensland in the presence of: ) Witness Signature Print Name Print Name in the presence of: ) Witness Signature Print Name Print Name (a) under seal; or (b) under s127(i) of the Corporations Act; or (c) under a duly executed Power of Attorney.
Appears in 6 contracts
Samples: Train Operations Agreement, Train Operations Agreement, Train Operations Agreement
Most Favoured Nation Status. [Delete clause 24.22 where End User is paying all Access Charges]
(a) If the Operator End User believes on reasonable grounds that:
(i) Aurizon Network has entered into an Access Agreement with another Railway Operator Access Holder for a Train service that transports the same specified commodity in the same specified geographic area as a Train Service provided in accordance with this Agreement (“Like Train Service”); and
(ii) the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s Access Undertaking, the Operator End User may provide written notification to Aurizon Network which must include the reasons why the Operator End User considers this to be the case.
(b) Within thirty (30) days of receipt of such notification, Aurizon Network must advise the OperatorEnd User:
(i) whether or not Aurizon Network agrees that the Access Agreement with the other Railway Operator Access Holder is for a Like Train Service and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon Network considers this to be the case;
(ii) if Aurizon Network agrees that the Access Agreement with the other Railway Operator Access Holder is for a Like Train Service, whether or not Aurizon Network agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s Access Undertaking and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon Network considers that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has not been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation; and
(iii) if Aurizon Network agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation then within sixty (60) days of advice provided pursuant to Clause 24.22(b17.23(b) Aurizon Network must advise the OperatorEnd User:
(A) whether or not Aurizon Network has been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s Access Undertaking; or
(B) if Aurizon Network has not been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service that Aurizon Network agrees to the reduction of the Access Charge payable by the Operator End User including the amount of the proposed reduced Access Charge.
(c) If the Operator End User does not agree with Aurizon Network’s response to its notification, the dispute shall be referred to an expert for resolution in accordance with Clause 18.311.3.
(d) If:
(i) another Railway Operator Access Holder provides Aurizon Network with notification that it believes that some or all of the OperatorEnd User’s Train Services are a Like Train Service to a Train service operated by the other Railway OperatorAccess Holder, and that the Access Charge has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s Access Undertaking; and
(ii) Aurizon Network agrees that this Agreement is for a Like Train Service and that any Access Charge under this Agreement has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s Access Undertaking, then Aurizon Network has the right by notice to the Operator End User to vary the Access Charge such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s Access Undertaking. Executed in Queensland in Item 1 End User: Name ACN Address Item 2 Commencement Date: Item 3 Termination Date: Item 4 Commitment Date: Item 5 Security Amount: Subject to Aurizon Network’s reasonable assessment of the presence creditworthiness of the End User, the Security Amount (if applicable) will be an amount equivalent to the greater of: ) Witness Signature Print Name Print Name in the presence of: ) Witness Signature Print Name Print Name
(a) twelve (12) weeks Access Charges under seal[this Agreement/a Train Operations Agreement] determined as if: (i) the End User had nominated an Operator and allocated all of the Access Rights to that Operator; or
and (ii) that Operator made maximum use of those Access Rights; or (b) under s127(i) the deductible for any one loss for the insurance policy specified in Schedule 4. [Where the End User is paying all of the Corporations Act; or
Access Charges paragraph (ca) above should refer to “Access Charges under this Agreement”. If the End User is only paying the TOP Charges, paragraph (a) should refer to “Access Charges under a duly executed Power of AttorneyTrain Operations Agreement”.]
Appears in 4 contracts
Samples: End User Access Agreement, End User Access Agreement, End User Access Agreement
Most Favoured Nation Status. [Delete clause 24.22 where End User is paying all Access Charges]
(a) If the Operator Access Holder believes on reasonable grounds that:
(i) Aurizon QR Network has entered into an Access Agreement access agreement with another Railway Operator for a Train service that transports the same specified commodity in the same specified geographic area as a Train Service provided in accordance with this Agreement (“Like Train Service”); and
(ii) the access charge Access Charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking, the Operator Access Holder may provide written notification to Aurizon QR Network which must include the reasons why the Operator Access Holder considers this to be the case.
(b) Within thirty (30) days of receipt of such notification, Aurizon QR Network must advise the OperatorAccess Holder:
(i) whether or not Aurizon QR Network agrees that the Access Agreement access agreement with the other Railway Operator is for a Like Train Service and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon QR Network considers this to be the case;
(ii) if Aurizon QR Network agrees that the Access Agreement access agreement with the other Railway Operator is for a Like Train Service, whether or not Aurizon QR Network agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon QR Network considers that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has not been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation; and
(iii) if Aurizon QR Network agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation then within sixty (60) days of advice provided pursuant to Clause 24.22(b22.22(b) Aurizon QR Network must advise the OperatorAccess Holder:
(A) whether or not Aurizon QR Network has been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking; or
(B) if Aurizon QR Network has not been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service that Aurizon QR Network agrees to the reduction of the Access Charge payable by the Operator Access Holder including the amount of the proposed reduced Access Charge.
(c) If the Operator Access Holder does not agree with Aurizon QR Network’s response to its notification, the dispute shall be referred to an expert for resolution in accordance with Clause 18.317.3.
(d) If:
(i) another Railway Operator provides Aurizon QR Network with notification that it believes that some or all of the OperatorAccess Holder’s Train Services are a Like Train Service to a Train service operated by the other Railway Operator, and that the Access Charge has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking; and
(ii) Aurizon QR Network agrees that this Agreement is for a Like Train Service and that any Access Charge under this Agreement has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking, then Aurizon Network has the right by notice to the Operator to vary the Access Charge such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s Access Undertaking. Executed in Queensland in the presence of: ) Witness Signature Print Name Print Name in the presence of: ) Witness Signature Print Name Print Name
(a) under seal; or
(b) under s127(i) of the Corporations Act; or
(c) under a duly executed Power of Attorney.,
Appears in 3 contracts
Samples: Access Agreement, Access Agreement, Access Agreement
Most Favoured Nation Status. [Delete clause 24.22 where End User is paying all Access Charges]
(a) If the Operator End User believes on reasonable grounds that:
(i) Aurizon Network has entered into an Access Agreement with another Railway Operator Access Holder for a Train service that transports the same specified commodity in the same specified geographic area as a Train Service provided in accordance with this Agreement (“Like Train Service”); and
(ii) the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s Access Undertaking, the Operator End User may provide written notification to Aurizon Network which must include the reasons why the Operator End User considers this to be the case.
(b) Within thirty (30) days of receipt of such notification, Aurizon Network must advise the OperatorEnd User:
(i) whether or not Aurizon Network agrees that the Access Agreement with the other Railway Operator Access Holder is for a Like Train Service and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon Network considers this to be the case;
(ii) if Aurizon Network agrees that the Access Agreement with the other Railway Operator Access Holder is for a Like Train Service, whether or not Aurizon Network agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s Access Undertaking and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon Network considers that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has not been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation; and
(iii) if Aurizon Network agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation then within sixty (60) days of advice provided pursuant to Clause 24.22(b17.23(b) Aurizon Network must advise the OperatorEnd User:
(A) whether or not Aurizon Network has been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s Access Undertaking; or
(B) if Aurizon Network has not been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service that Aurizon Network agrees to the reduction of the Access Charge payable by the Operator End User including the amount of the proposed reduced Access Charge.
(c) If the Operator End User does not agree with Aurizon Network’s response to its notification, the dispute shall be referred to an expert for resolution in accordance with Clause 18.311.3.
(d) If:
(i) another Railway Operator Access Holder provides Aurizon Network with notification that it believes that some or all of the OperatorEnd User’s Train Services are a Like Train Service to a Train service operated by the other Railway OperatorAccess Holder, and that the Access Charge has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s Access Undertaking; and
(ii) Aurizon Network agrees that this Agreement is for a Like Train Service and that any Access Charge under this Agreement has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s Access Undertaking, then Aurizon Network has the right by notice to the Operator End User to vary the Access Charge such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s Access Undertaking. Executed in Queensland in Item 1 End User: Name ACN Address Item 2 Commencement Date: Item 3 Termination Date: Item 4 Commitment Date: Item 5 Security Amount: Subject to Aurizon Network’s reasonable assessment of the presence creditworthiness of the End User, the Security Amount (if applicable) will be an amount equivalent to the greater of: ) Witness Signature Print Name Print Name in the presence of: ) Witness Signature Print Name Print Name
(a) twelve (12) weeks Access Charges under seal; or
(b) under s127(i) of the Corporations Act; or
(c) under a duly executed Power of Attorney.[this Agreement/a
Appears in 2 contracts
Samples: End User Access Agreement, End User Access Agreement
Most Favoured Nation Status. [Delete clause 24.22 where End User is paying all Access Charges]
(a) If the Operator believes on reasonable grounds that:
(i) Aurizon QR Network has entered into an Access Agreement access agreement with another Railway Operator for a Train service that transports the same specified commodity in the same specified geographic area as a Train Service provided in accordance with this Agreement (“Like Train Service”); and
(ii) the access charge Access Charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking, the Operator may provide written notification to Aurizon QR Network which must include the reasons why the Operator considers this to be the case.
(b) Within thirty (30) days of receipt of such notification, Aurizon QR Network must advise the Operator:
(i) whether or not Aurizon QR Network agrees that the Access Agreement access agreement with the other Railway Operator is for a Like Train Service and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon QR Network considers this to be the case;
(ii) if Aurizon QR Network agrees that the Access Agreement access agreement with the other Railway Operator is for a Like Train Service, whether or not Aurizon QR Network agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon QR Network considers that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has not been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation; and
(iii) if Aurizon QR Network agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation then within sixty (60) days of advice provided pursuant to Clause 24.22(b) Aurizon QR Network must advise the Operator:
(A) whether or not Aurizon QR Network has been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking; or
(B) if Aurizon QR Network has not been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service that Aurizon QR Network agrees to the reduction of the Access Charge payable by the Operator including the amount of the proposed reduced Access Charge.
(c) If the Operator does not agree with Aurizon QR Network’s response to its notification, the dispute shall be referred to an expert for resolution in accordance with Clause 18.3.
(d) If:
(i) another Railway Operator provides Aurizon QR Network with notification that it believes that some or all of the Operator’s Train Services are a Like Train Service to a Train service operated by the other Railway Operator, and that the Access Charge has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking; and
(ii) Aurizon QR Network agrees that this Agreement is for a Like Train Service and that any Access Charge under this Agreement has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking, then Aurizon QR Network has the right by notice to the Operator to vary the Access Charge such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking. Executed in Queensland in the presence of: ) Witness Signature Print Name Print Name in the presence of: ) Witness Signature Witness Print Name Print Name
(a) under seal; or
(b) under s127(i) of the Corporations Act; or
(c) under a duly executed Power of Attorney.
Appears in 1 contract
Samples: Train Operations Agreement
Most Favoured Nation Status. [Delete clause 24.22 where End User is paying all Access Charges]
(a) If the Operator End User believes on reasonable grounds that:
(i) Aurizon Network Queensland Rail has entered into an Access Agreement with another Railway Operator Access Holder for a Train service that transports the same specified commodity in the same specified geographic area as a Train Service provided in accordance with this Agreement (“Like Train Service”); and
(ii) the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon NetworkQueensland Rail’s Access Undertaking, the Operator End User may provide written notification to Aurizon Network Queensland Rail which must include the reasons why the Operator End User considers this to be the case.
(b) Within thirty (30) days of receipt of such notification, Aurizon Network Queensland Rail must advise the OperatorEnd User:
(i) whether or not Aurizon Network Queensland Rail agrees that the Access Agreement with the other Railway Operator Access Holder is for a Like Train Service and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon Network Queensland Rail considers this to be the case;
(ii) if Aurizon Network Queensland Rail agrees that the Access Agreement with the other Railway Operator Access Holder is for a Like Train Service, whether or not Aurizon Network Queensland Rail agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon NetworkQueensland Rail’s Access Undertaking and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon Network Queensland Rail considers that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has not been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation; and
(iii) if Aurizon Network Queensland Rail agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation then within sixty (60) days of advice provided pursuant to Clause 24.22(b17.23(b) Aurizon Network Queensland Rail must advise the OperatorEnd User:
(A) whether or not Aurizon Network Queensland Rail has been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon NetworkQueensland Rail’s Access Undertaking; or
(B) if Aurizon Network Queensland Rail has not been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service that Aurizon Network Queensland Rail agrees to the reduction of the Access Charge payable by the Operator End User including the amount of the proposed reduced Access Charge.. Formatted: Font: Times New Roman, 6 pt
(c) If the Operator End User does not agree with Aurizon NetworkQueensland Rail’s response to its notification, the dispute shall be referred to an expert for resolution in accordance with Clause 18.311.3.
(d) If:
(i) another Railway Operator Access Holder provides Aurizon Network Queensland Rail with notification that it believes that some or all of the OperatorEnd User’s Train Services are a Like Train Service to a Train service operated by the other Railway OperatorAccess Holder, and that the Access Charge has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon NetworkQueensland Rail’s Access Undertaking; and
(ii) Aurizon Network Queensland Rail agrees that this Agreement is for a Like Train Service and that any Access Charge under this Agreement has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon NetworkQueensland Rail’s Access Undertaking, then Aurizon Network Queensland Rail has the right by notice to the Operator End User to vary the Access Charge such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon NetworkQueensland Rail’s Access Undertaking. Executed in Item 1 End User: Name ACN Address Item 2 Commencement Date: Item 3 Termination Date: Item 4 Commitment Date: Item 5 Security Amount: Subject to Queensland in Rail’s reasonable assessment of the presence creditworthiness of the End User, the Security Amount (if applicable) will be an amount equivalent to the greater of: ) Witness Signature Print Name Print Name in the presence of: ) Witness Signature Print Name Print Name
(a) twelve (12) weeks Access Charges under seal[this Agreement/a Train Operations Agreement] determined as if: (i) the End User had nominated an Operator and allocated all of the Access Rights to that Operator; or
and (ii) that Operator made maximum use of those Access Rights; or (b) under s127(i) the deductible for any one loss for the insurance policy specified in Schedule 4. [Where the End User is paying all of the Corporations Act; or
Access Charges paragraph (ca) above should refer to “Access Charges under this Agreement”. If the End User is only paying the TOP Charges, paragraph (a) should refer to “Access Charges under a duly executed Power of AttorneyTrain Operations Agreement”.]
Appears in 1 contract
Samples: End User Access Agreement
Most Favoured Nation Status. [Delete clause 24.22 where End User is paying all Access Charges]
(a) If the Operator End User believes on reasonable grounds that:
(i) Aurizon QR Network has entered into an Access Agreement with another Railway Access HolderRailway Operator for a Train service that transports the same specified commodity in the same specified geographic area as a Train Service provided in accordance with this Agreement (“Like Train Service”); and
(ii) the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking, the Operator End User may provide written notification to Aurizon QR Network which must include the reasons why the Operator End User considers this to be the case.
(b) Within thirty (30) days of receipt of such notification, Aurizon QR Network must advise the OperatorEnd User:
(i) whether or not Aurizon QR Network agrees that the Access Agreement with the other Railway Access HolderRailway Operator is for a Like Train Service and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon QR Network considers this to be the case;
(ii) if Aurizon QR Network agrees that the Access Agreement with the other Railway Access HolderRailway Operator is for a Like Train Service, whether or not Aurizon QR Network agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon QR Network considers that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has not been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation; and
(iii) if Aurizon QR Network agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation then within sixty (60) days of advice provided pursuant to Clause 24.22(b17.23(b) Aurizon QR Network must advise the OperatorEnd User:
(A) whether or not Aurizon QR Network has been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking; or
(B) if Aurizon QR Network has not been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service that Aurizon QR Network agrees to the reduction of the Access Charge payable by the Operator End User including the amount of the proposed reduced Access Charge.
(c) If the Operator End User does not agree with Aurizon QR Network’s response to its notification, the dispute shall be referred to an expert for resolution in accordance with Clause 18.311.3.
(d) If:
(i) another Railway Access HolderRailway Operator provides Aurizon QR Network with notification that it believes that some or all of the OperatorEnd User’s Train Services are a Like Train Service to a Train service operated by the other Railway Access HolderRailway Operator, and that the Access Charge has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking; and
(ii) Aurizon QR Network agrees that this Agreement is for a Like Train Service and that any Access Charge under this Agreement has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking, then Aurizon QR Network has the right by notice to the Operator End User to vary the Access Charge such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking. Executed in Queensland in the presence ofFormatted: ) Witness Signature Print Name Print Name in the presence of: ) Witness Signature Print Name Print Name
(a) under seal; or
(b) under s127(i) of the Corporations Act; or
(c) under a duly executed Power of Attorney.Bullets and Numbering
Appears in 1 contract
Samples: End User Access Agreement
Most Favoured Nation Status. [Delete clause 24.22 where End User is paying all Access Charges]
(a) If the Operator believes on reasonable grounds that:
(i) Aurizon Network Queensland Rail has entered into an Access Agreement with another Railway Operator for a Train service that transports the same specified commodity in the same specified geographic area as a Train Service provided in accordance with this Agreement (“Like Train Service”); and
(ii) the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon NetworkQueensland Rail’s Access Undertaking, the Operator may provide written notification to Aurizon Network Queensland Rail which must include the reasons why the Operator considers this to be the case.
(b) Within thirty (30) days of receipt of such notification, Aurizon Network Queensland Rail must advise the Operator:
(i) whether or not Aurizon Network Queensland Rail agrees that the Access Agreement with the other Railway Operator is for a Like Train Service and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon Network Queensland Rail considers this to be the case;
(ii) if Aurizon Network Queensland Rail agrees that the Access Agreement with the other Railway Operator is for a Like Train Service, whether or not Aurizon Network Queensland Rail agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon NetworkQueensland Rail’s Access Undertaking and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon Network Queensland Rail considers that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has not been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation; and
(iii) if Aurizon Network Queensland Rail agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price Deleted: 19.22(b) Deleted: 24.22(b) differentiation then within sixty (60) days of advice provided pursuant to Clause 24.22(b19.22(b) Aurizon Network Queensland Rail must advise the Operator:
(A) whether or not Aurizon Network Queensland Rail has been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon NetworkQueensland Rail’s Access Undertaking; or
(B) if Aurizon Network Queensland Rail has not been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service that Aurizon Network Queensland Rail agrees to the reduction of the Access Charge payable by the Operator including the amount of the proposed reduced Access Charge.. Deleted: 13.3
(c) If the Operator does not agree with Aurizon NetworkQueensland Rail’s response to its notification, the dispute shall be referred to an expert for resolution in accordance with Clause 18.313.3.
(d) If:
(i) another Railway Operator provides Aurizon Network Queensland Rail with notification that it believes that some or all of the Operator’s Train Services are a Like Train Service to a Train service operated by the other Railway Operator, and that the Access Charge has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon NetworkQueensland Rail’s Access Undertaking; and
(ii) Aurizon Network Queensland Rail agrees that this Agreement is for a Like Train Service and that any Access Charge under this Agreement has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon NetworkQueensland Rail’s Access Undertaking, then Aurizon Network Queensland Rail has the right by notice to the Operator to vary the Access Charge such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon NetworkQueensland Rail’s Access Undertaking. Executed in Queensland SIGNED for and on behalf of ) QUEENSLAND RAIL ) in the presence of: ) Witness Signature Print Name Print Name in the presence of: ) Witness Signature Print Name Print NameName Note: Queensland Rail will require the Operator to execute this Agreement either:
(a) under seal; or
(b) under s127(i) of the Corporations Act; or
(c) under a duly executed Power of Attorney.
Appears in 1 contract
Samples: Train Operations Agreement
Most Favoured Nation Status. [Delete clause 24.22 where End User is paying all Access Charges]
(a) If the Operator Access Holder believes on reasonable grounds that:
(i) Aurizon Network QR has entered into an Access Agreement access agreement with another Railway Operator for a Train service servic e that transports the same specified commodity in the same specified geographic area as a Train Service provided in accordance with this Agreement (““ Like Train ServiceService ”); and
(ii) the access charge Access Charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon NetworkQR’s Access Undertaking, Undertaking the Operator Access Holder may provide written notification to Aurizon Network QR which must include the reasons why the Operator Access Holder considers this to be the case.
(b) Within thirty (30) days of receipt of such notification, Aurizon Network QR must advise the OperatorAccess Holder:
(i) whether or not Aurizon Network QR agrees that the Access Agreement access agreement with the other Railway Operator is for a Like Train Service and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon Network QR considers this to be the case;
(ii) if Aurizon Network QR agrees that the Access Agreement access agreement with the other Railway Operator is for a Like Train Service, whether or not Aurizon Network QR agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon NetworkQR’s Access Undertaking and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon Network QR considers that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has not been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation; and
(iii) if Aurizon Network QR agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation then within sixty (60) days of advice provided pursuant to Clause 24.22(b22.22(b) Aurizon Network QR must advise the OperatorAccess Holder:
(A) whether or not Aurizon Network QR has been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon NetworkQR’s Access Undertaking; or
(B) if Aurizon Network QR has not been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service that Aurizon Network QR agrees to the reduction of the Access Charge payable by the Operator Access Holder including the amount of the proposed reduced Access Charge.
(c) If the Operator Access Holder does not agree with Aurizon NetworkQR’s response to its notification, the dispute shall be referred to an expert for resolution in accordance with Clause 18.317.3.
(d) If:
(i) another Railway Operator provides Aurizon Network QR with notification that it believes that some or all of the OperatorAccess Holder’s Train Services are a Like Train Service to a Train service operated by the other Railway Operator, and that the Access Charge has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon NetworkQR’s Access Undertaking; and
(ii) Aurizon Network QR agrees that this Agreement is for a Like Train Service and that any Access Charge under this Agreement has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon NetworkQR’s Access Undertaking, ; then Aurizon Network QR has the right by notice to the Operator Access Holder to vary the Access Charge such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon NetworkQR’s Access Undertaking. Executed in Queensland in the presence of: ) ____________________________________ Witness Signature ____________________________________ ______________________________________ Print Name Print Name in the presence of: ) ____________________________________ ______ Witness Signature Witness ____________________________________ Print Name Print Name
(a) under seal; or
(b) under s127(i) of the Corporations Act; or
(c) under a duly executed Power of Attorney.
Appears in 1 contract
Samples: Access Agreement
Most Favoured Nation Status. [Delete clause 24.22 where End User is paying all Access Charges]
(a) If the Operator believes on reasonable grounds that:
(i) Aurizon QR Network has entered into an Access Agreement access agreement with another Railway Operator for a Train service that transports the same specified commodity in the same specified geographic area as a Train Service provided in accordance with this Agreement (“Like Train Service”); and
(ii) the access charge Access Charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s QR Network‟s Access Undertaking, the Operator may provide written notification to Aurizon QR Network which must include the reasons why the Operator considers this to be the case.
(b) Within thirty (30) days of receipt of such notification, Aurizon QR Network must advise the Operator:
(i) whether or not Aurizon QR Network agrees that the Access Agreement access agreement with the other Railway Operator is for a Like Train Service and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon QR Network considers this to be the case;
(ii) if Aurizon QR Network agrees that the Access Agreement access agreement with the other Railway Operator is for a Like Train Service, whether or not Aurizon QR Network agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s QR Network‟s Access Undertaking and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon QR Network considers that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has not been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation; and
(iii) if Aurizon QR Network agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation then within sixty (60) days of advice provided pursuant to Clause 24.22(b) Aurizon QR Network must advise the Operator:
(A) whether or not Aurizon QR Network has been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s QR Network‟s Access Undertaking; or
(B) if Aurizon QR Network has not been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service that Aurizon QR Network agrees to the reduction of the Access Charge payable by the Operator including the amount of the proposed reduced Access Charge.
(c) If the Operator does not agree with Aurizon Network’s QR Network‟s response to its notification, the dispute shall be referred to an expert for resolution in accordance with Clause 18.3.
(d) If:
(i) another Railway Operator provides Aurizon QR Network with notification that it believes that some or all of the Operator’s Operator‟s Train Services are a Like Train Service to a Train service operated by the other Railway Operator, and that the Access Charge has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s QR Network‟s Access Undertaking; and
(ii) Aurizon QR Network agrees that this Agreement is for a Like Train Service and that any Access Charge under this Agreement has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s QR Network‟s Access Undertaking, then Aurizon QR Network has the right by notice to the Operator to vary the Access Charge such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s QR Network‟s Access Undertaking. Executed in Queensland SIGNED for and on behalf of ) QR NETWORK PTY LTD ) in the presence of: ) Witness Signature Print Name Print Name in the presence of: ) Witness Signature Print Name Print Name
(a) under seal; or
(b) under s127(i) of the Corporations Act; or
(c) under a duly executed Power of Attorney.
Appears in 1 contract
Samples: Train Operations Agreement
Most Favoured Nation Status. [Delete clause 24.22 where End User is paying all Access Charges]
(a) If the Operator End User believes on reasonable grounds that:
(i) Aurizon QR Network has entered into an Access Agreement access agreement with another Railway Operator for a Train service that transports the same specified commodity in the same specified geographic area as a Train Service provided in accordance with this Agreement (“Like Train Service”); and
(ii) the access charge Access Charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s Access Undertaking, the Operator may provide written notification to Aurizon Network which must include the reasons why the Operator considers this to be the case.in
(b) Within thirty (30) days of receipt of such notification, Aurizon QR Network must advise the OperatorEnd User:
(i) whether or not Aurizon QR Network agrees that the Access Agreement access agreement with the other Railway Operator is for a Like Train Service and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon QR Network considers this to be the case;
(ii) if Aurizon QR Network agrees that the Access Agreement access agreement with the other Railway Operator is for a Like Train Service, whether or not Aurizon QR Network agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s QR Network‟s Access Undertaking and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon QR Network considers that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has not been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation; and
(iii) if Aurizon QR Network agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation then within sixty (60) days of advice provided pursuant to Clause 24.22(b18.23(b) Aurizon QR Network must advise the OperatorEnd User:
(A) whether or not Aurizon QR Network has been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s QR Network‟s Access Undertaking; or
(B) if Aurizon QR Network has not been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service that Aurizon QR Network agrees to the reduction of the Access Charge payable by the Operator including the amount of the proposed reduced Access Charge.
(c) If the Operator End User does not agree with Aurizon Network’s QR Network‟s response to its notification, the dispute shall be referred to an expert for resolution in accordance with Clause 18.312.3.
(d) If:
(i) another Railway Operator provides Aurizon QR Network with notification that it believes that some or all of the Operator’s End User‟s Train Services are a Like Train Service to a Train service operated by the other Railway Operator, and that the Access Charge has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s Access Undertaking; andout
(ii) Aurizon QR Network agrees that this Agreement is for a Like Train Service and that any Access Charge under this the Train Operations Agreement has been developed in contravention c ontravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s QR Network‟s Access Undertaking, then Aurizon Network has the right by notice to the Operator to vary the Access Charge such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s QR Network‟s Access Undertaking. Executed in Queensland in the presence of: ) Witness Signature Print Name Print Name in the presence of: ) Witness Signature Print Name Print Name
(a) under seal; or
(b) under s127(i) of the Corporations Act; or
(c) under a duly executed Power of Attorney.
Appears in 1 contract
Samples: End User Access Agreement
Most Favoured Nation Status. [Delete clause 24.22 where End User is paying all Access Charges]
(a) If the Operator Access Holder believes on reasonable grounds that:
(i) Aurizon Network QR has entered into an Access Agreement access agreement with another Railway Operator for a Train service that transports the same specified commodity in the same specified geographic area as a Train Service provided in accordance with this Agreement (“Like Train Service”); and
(ii) the access charge Access Charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon NetworkQR’s Access Undertaking, the Operator Access Holder may provide written notification to Aurizon Network QR which must include the reasons why the Operator Access Holder considers this to be the case.
(b) Within thirty (30) days of receipt of such notification, Aurizon Network QR must advise the OperatorAccess Holder:
(i) whether or not Aurizon Network QR agrees that the Access Agreement access agreement with the other Railway Operator is for a Like Train Service and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon Network QR considers this to be the case;
(ii) if Aurizon Network QR agrees that the Access Agreement access agreement with the other Railway Operator is for a Like Train Service, whether or not Aurizon Network QR agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon NetworkQR’s Access Undertaking and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon Network QR considers that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has not been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation; and
(iii) if Aurizon Network QR agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation then within sixty (60) days of advice provided pursuant to Clause 24.22(b22.22(b) Aurizon Network QR must advise the OperatorAccess Holder:
(A) whether or not Aurizon Network QR has been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon NetworkQR’s Access Undertaking; or
(B) if Aurizon Network QR has not been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service that Aurizon Network QR agrees to the reduction of the Access Charge payable by the Operator Access Holder including the amount of the proposed reduced Access Charge.
(c) If the Operator Access Holder does not agree with Aurizon NetworkQR’s response to its notification, the dispute shall be referred to an expert for resolution in accordance with Clause 18.317.3.
(d) If:
(i) another Railway Operator provides Aurizon Network QR with notification that it believes that some or all of the OperatorAccess Holder’s Train Services are a Like Train Service to a Train service operated by the other Railway Operator, and that the Access Charge has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon NetworkQR’s Access Undertaking; and
(ii) Aurizon Network QR agrees that this Agreement is for a Like Train Service and that any Access Charge under this Agreement has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon NetworkQR’s Access Undertaking, then Aurizon Network QR has the right by notice to the Operator Access Holder to vary the Access Charge such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon NetworkQR’s Access Undertaking. Executed in Queensland in the presence of: ) Witness Signature Print Name Print Name in the presence of: ) Witness Signature Witness Print Name Print Name
(a) under seal; or
(b) under s127(i) of the Corporations Act; or
(c) under a duly executed Power of Attorney.
Appears in 1 contract
Samples: Access Agreement
Most Favoured Nation Status. [Delete clause 24.22 where End User is paying all Access Charges]
(a) If the Operator End User believes on reasonable grounds that:
(i) Aurizon QR Network has entered into an Access Agreement with another Railway Operator Access Holder for a Train service that transports the same specified commodity in the same specified geographic area as a Train Service provided in accordance with this Agreement (“Like Train Service”); and
(ii) the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking, the Operator End User may provide written notification to Aurizon QR Network which must include the reasons why the Operator End User considers this to be the case.
(b) Within thirty (30) days of receipt of such notification, Aurizon QR Network must advise the OperatorEnd User:
(i) whether or not Aurizon QR Network agrees that the Access Agreement with the other Railway Operator Access Holder is for a Like Train Service and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon QR Network considers this to be the case;
(ii) if Aurizon QR Network agrees that the Access Agreement with the other Railway Operator Access Holder is for a Like Train Service, whether or not Aurizon QR Network agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon QR Network considers that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has not been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation; and
(iii) if Aurizon QR Network agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation then within sixty (60) days of advice provided pursuant to Clause 24.22(b17.23(b) Aurizon QR Network must advise the OperatorEnd User:
(A) whether or not Aurizon QR Network has been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking; or
(B) if Aurizon QR Network has not been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service that Aurizon QR Network agrees to the reduction of the Access Charge payable by the Operator End User including the amount of the proposed reduced Access Charge.
(c) If the Operator End User does not agree with Aurizon QR Network’s response to its notification, the dispute shall be referred to an expert for resolution in accordance with Clause 18.311.3.
(d) If:
(i) another Railway Operator Access Holder provides Aurizon QR Network with notification that it believes that some or all of the OperatorEnd User’s Train Services are a Like Train Service to a Train service operated by the other Railway OperatorAccess Holder, and that the Access Charge has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking; and
(ii) Aurizon QR Network agrees that this Agreement is for a Like Train Service and that any Access Charge under this Agreement has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking, then Aurizon QR Network has the right by notice to the Operator End User to vary the Access Charge such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking. Executed in Queensland in Reference Schedule Item 1 End User: Name ACN Address Item 2 Commencement Date: Item 3 Termination Date: Item 4 Commitment Date: Item 5 Security Amount: Subject to QR Network’s reasonable assessment of the presence creditworthiness of the End User, the Security Amount (if applicable) will be an amount equivalent to the greater of: ) Witness Signature Print Name Print Name in the presence of: ) Witness Signature Print Name Print Name
(a) twelve (12) weeks Access Charges under seal[this Agreement/a Train Operations Agreement] determined as if:
(i) the End User had nominated an Operator and allocated all of the Access Rights to that Operator; and
(ii) that Operator made maximum use of those Access Rights; or
(b) under s127(i) of the Corporations Act; or
(c) under a duly executed Power of Attorney.
Appears in 1 contract
Samples: End User Access Agreement
Most Favoured Nation Status. [Delete clause 24.22 where End User is paying all Access Charges]
(a) If the Operator believes on reasonable grounds that:
(i) Aurizon QR Network has entered into an Access Agreement access agreement with another Railway Operator for a Train service that transports the same specified commodity in the same specified geographic area as a Train Service provided in accordance with this Agreement (“Like Train Service”); and
(ii) the access charge Access Charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking, the Undertaking The Operator may provide written notification to Aurizon QR Network which must include the reasons why the Operator considers this to be the case.
(b) Within thirty (30) days of receipt of such notification, Aurizon QR Network must advise the Operator:
(i) whether or not Aurizon QR Network agrees that the Access Agreement access agreement with the other Railway Operator is for a Like Train Service and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon QR Network considers this to be the case;
(ii) if Aurizon QR Network agrees that the Access Agreement access agreement with the other Railway Operator is for a Like Train Service, whether or not Aurizon QR Network agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon QR Network considers that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has not been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation; and
(iii) if Aurizon QR Network agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation then within sixty (60) days of advice provided pursuant to Clause 24.22(b22.22(b) Aurizon QR Network must advise the Operator:
(A) whether or not Aurizon QR Network has been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking; or
(B) if Aurizon QR Network has not been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service that Aurizon QR Network agrees to the reduction of the Access Charge payable by the Operator including the amount of the proposed reduced Access Charge.
(c) If the Operator does not agree with Aurizon QR Network’s response to its notification, the dispute shall be referred to an expert the Dispute Managers for resolution in accordance with Clause 18.317.2.
(d) If:
(i) another Railway Operator provides Aurizon QR Network with notification that it believes that some or all of the Operator’s Train Services are a Like Train Service to a Train service operated by the other Railway Operator, and that the Access Charge has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking; and
(ii) Aurizon QR Network agrees that this Agreement is for a Like Train Service and that any Access Charge under this Agreement has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking, ; then Aurizon QR Network has the right by notice to the Operator to vary the Access Charge such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking. Executed in Queensland in the presence of: ) Witness Signature Print Name Print Name in the presence of: ) Witness Signature Print Name Print Name
(a) under seal; or
(b) under s127(i) of the Corporations Act; or
(c) under a duly executed Power of Attorney.
Appears in 1 contract
Samples: Access Agreement
Most Favoured Nation Status. [Delete clause 24.22 where End User is paying all Access Charges]
(a) If the Operator End User believes on reasonable grounds that:
(i) Aurizon Network has entered into an Access Agreement with another Railway Operator Access Holder for a Train service that transports the same specified commodity in the same specified geographic area as a Train Service provided in accordance with this Agreement (“Like Train Service”); and
(ii) the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s Access Undertaking, the Operator End User may provide written notification to Aurizon Network which must include the reasons why the Operator End User considers this to be the case.
(b) Within thirty (30) days of receipt of such notification, Aurizon Network must advise the OperatorEnd User:
(i) whether or not Aurizon Network agrees that the Access Agreement with the other Railway Operator Access Holder is for a Like Train Service and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon Network considers this to be the case;
(ii) if Aurizon Network agrees that the Access Agreement with the other Railway Operator Access Holder is for a Like Train Service, whether or not Aurizon Network agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s Access Undertaking and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon Network considers that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has not been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation; and
(iii) if Aurizon Network agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation then within sixty (60) days of advice provided pursuant to Clause 24.22(b17.23(b) Aurizon Network must advise the OperatorEnd User:
(A) whether or not Aurizon Network has been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s Access Undertaking; or
(B) if Aurizon Network has not been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service that Aurizon Network agrees to the reduction of the Access Charge payable by the Operator End User including the amount of the proposed reduced Access Charge.
(c) If the Operator End User does not agree with Aurizon Network’s response to its notification, the dispute shall be referred to an expert for resolution in accordance with Clause 18.311.3.
(d) If:
(i) another Railway Operator Access Holder provides Aurizon Network with notification that it believes that some or all of the OperatorEnd User’s Train Services are a Like Train Service to a Train service operated by the other Railway OperatorAccess Holder, and that the Access Charge has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s Access Undertaking; and
(ii) Aurizon Network agrees that this Agreement is for a Like Train Service and that any Access Charge under this Agreement has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s Access Undertaking, then Aurizon Network has the right by notice to the Operator End User to vary the Access Charge such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s Access Undertaking. Executed in Queensland in Reference Schedule Item 1 End User: Name ACN Address Item 2 Commencement Date: Item 3 Termination Date: Item 4 Commitment Date: Item 5 Security Amount: Subject to Aurizon Network’s reasonable assessment of the presence creditworthiness of the End User, the Security Amount (if applicable) will be an amount equivalent to the greater of: ) Witness Signature Print Name Print Name in the presence of: ) Witness Signature Print Name Print Name
(a) twelve (12) weeks Access Charges under seal; or
(b) under s127(i) of the Corporations Act; or
(c) under a duly executed Power of Attorney.[this Agreement/a
Appears in 1 contract
Samples: End User Access Agreement
Most Favoured Nation Status. [Delete clause 24.22 where End User is paying all Access Charges]
(a) If the Operator believes on reasonable grounds that:
(i) Aurizon Network QR has entered into an Access Agreement access agreement with another Railway Operator for a Train service that transports the same specified commodity in the same specified geographic area as a Train Service provided in accordance with this Agreement (“Like Train Service”); and
(ii) the access charge Access Charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon NetworkQR’s Access Undertaking, the Operator may provide written notification to Aurizon Network QR which must include the reasons why the Operator considers this to be the case.
(b) Within thirty (30) days of receipt of such notification, Aurizon Network QR must advise the Operator:
(i) whether or not Aurizon Network QR agrees that the Access Agreement access agreement with the other Railway Operator is for a Like Train Service and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon Network QR considers this to be the case;
(ii) if Aurizon Network QR agrees that the Access Agreement access agreement with the other Railway Operator is for a Like Train Service, whether or not Aurizon Network QR agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon NetworkQR’s Access Undertaking and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon Network QR considers that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has not been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation; and
(iii) if Aurizon Network QR agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation then within sixty (60) days of advice provided pursuant to Clause 24.22(b22.22(b) Aurizon Network QR must advise the Operator:
(A) whether or not Aurizon Network QR has been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon NetworkQR’s Access Undertaking; or
(B) if Aurizon Network QR has not been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service that Aurizon Network QR agrees to the reduction of the Access Charge payable by the Operator including the amount of the proposed reduced Access Charge.
(c) If the Operator does not agree with Aurizon NetworkQR’s response to its notification, the dispute shall be referred to an expert for resolution in accordance with Clause 18.317.3.
(d) If:
(i) another Railway Operator provides Aurizon Network QR with notification that it believes that some or all of the Operator’s Train Services are a Like Train Service to a Train service operated by the other Railway Operator, and that the Access Charge has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon NetworkQR’s Access Undertaking; and
(ii) Aurizon Network QR agrees that this Agreement is for a Like Train Service and that any Access Charge under this Agreement has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon NetworkQR’s Access Undertaking, then Aurizon Network QR has the right by notice to the Operator to vary the Access Charge such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon NetworkQR’s Access Undertaking. Executed in Queensland QR NETWORK PTY LTD ) in the presence of: ) Witness Signature Print Name Print Name [the OPERATOR] ) in the presence of: ) Witness Signature Witness Print Name Print Name
(a) under seal; or
(b) under s127(i) of the Corporations Act; or
(c) under a duly executed Power of Attorney.
Appears in 1 contract
Samples: Operator Access Agreement
Most Favoured Nation Status. [Delete clause 24.22 where End User is paying all Access Charges]
(a) If the Operator believes on reasonable grounds that:
(i) Aurizon QR Network has entered into an Access Agreement access agreement with another Railway Operator for a Train service that transports the same specified commodity in the same specified geographic area as a Train Service provided in accordance with this Agreement (“Like Train Service”); and
(ii) the access charge Access Charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s the QR Network Access Undertaking, the Operator may provide written notification to Aurizon QR Network which must include the reasons why the Operator considers this to be the case.
(b) Within thirty (30) days of receipt of such notification, Aurizon QR Network must advise the Operator:
(i) whether or not Aurizon QR Network agrees that the Access Agreement access agreement with the other Railway Operator is for a Like Train Service and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon QR Network considers this to be the case;
(ii) if Aurizon QR Network agrees that the Access Agreement access agreement with the other Railway Operator is for a Like Train Service, whether or not Aurizon QR Network agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s the QR Network Access Undertaking and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon QR Network considers that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has not been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation; and
(iii) if Aurizon QR Network agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation then within sixty (60) days of advice provided pursuant to Clause 24.22(b22.22(b) Aurizon QR Network must advise the Operator:
(A) whether or not Aurizon QR Network has been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s the QR Network Access Undertaking; or
(B) if Aurizon QR Network has not been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service that Aurizon QR Network agrees to the reduction of the Access Charge payable by the Operator including the amount of the proposed reduced Access Charge.
(c) If the Operator does not agree with Aurizon QR Network’s response to its notification, the dispute shall be referred to an expert for resolution in accordance with Clause 18.317.3.
(d) If:
(i) another Railway Operator provides Aurizon QR Network with notification that it believes that some or all of the Operator’s Train Services are a Like Train Service to a Train service operated by the other Railway Operator, and that the Access Charge has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s the QR Network Access Undertaking; and
(ii) Aurizon QR Network agrees that this Agreement is for a Like Train Service and that any Access Charge under this Agreement has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s the QR Network Access Undertaking, then Aurizon QR Network has the right by notice to the Operator to vary the Access Charge such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s the QR Network Access Undertaking. Executed in Queensland in the presence of: ) Witness Signature Print Name Print Name in the presence of: ) Witness Signature Print Name Print Name
(a) under seal; or
(b) under s127(i) of the Corporations Act; or
(c) under a duly executed Power of Attorney.
Appears in 1 contract
Samples: Access Agreement
Most Favoured Nation Status. [Delete clause 24.22 where End User is paying all Access Charges]
(a) If the Operator believes on reasonable grounds that:
(i) Aurizon QRAurizon Network has entered into an Access access agreementAccess Agreement with another Railway Operator for a Train service that transports the same specified commodity in the same specified geographic area as a Train Service provided in accordance with this Agreement (“Like Train Service”); and
(ii) the access Access Chargeaccess charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QRAurizon Network’s Access Undertaking, the Operator may provide written notification to Aurizon QRAurizon Network which must include the reasons why the Operator considers this to be the case.
(b) Within thirty (30) days of receipt of such notification, Aurizon QRAurizon Network must advise the Operator:
(i) whether or not Aurizon QRAurizon Network agrees that the Access access agreementAccess Agreement with the other Railway Operator is for a Like Train Service and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon QRAurizon Network considers this to be the case;
(ii) if Aurizon QRAurizon Network agrees that the Access access agreementAccess Agreement with the other Railway Operator is for a Like Train Service, whether or not Aurizon QRAurizon Network agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QRAurizon Network’s Access Undertaking and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon QRAurizon Network considers that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has not been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation; and
(iii) if Aurizon QRAurizon Network agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation then within sixty (60) days of advice provided pursuant to Clause 24.22(b) Aurizon QRAurizon Network must advise the Operator:
(A) whether or not Aurizon QRAurizon Network has been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QRAurizon Network’s Access Undertaking; or
(B) if Aurizon QRAurizon Network has not been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service that Aurizon QRAurizon Network agrees to the reduction of the Access Charge payable by the Operator including the amount of the proposed reduced Access Charge.
(c) If the Operator does not agree with Aurizon QRAurizon Network’s response to its notification, the dispute shall be referred to an expert for resolution in accordance with Clause 18.3.
(d) If:
(i) another Railway Operator provides Aurizon QRAurizon Network with notification that it believes that some or all of the Operator’s Train Services are a Like Train Service to a Train service operated by the other Railway Operator, and that the Access Charge has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QRAurizon Network’s Access Undertaking; and
(ii) Aurizon QRAurizon Network agrees that this Agreement is for a Like Train Service and that any Access Charge under this Agreement has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QRAurizon Network’s Access Undertaking, then Aurizon QRAurizon Network has the right by notice to the Operator to vary the Access Charge such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QRAurizon Network’s Access Undertaking. Executed in Queensland QRAURIZON NETWORK PTY LTD ) in the presence of: ) Witness Signature _ Print Name Print Name Print Name Print Name in the presence of: ) _ Witness Witness Signature Print Name Print NameName Print Name Print Name Note: QRAurizon Network will require the Operator to execute this Agreement either:
(a) under seal; or
(b) under s127(i) of the Corporations Act; or
(c) under a duly executed Power of Attorney.. Schedule 1 TRAIN SERVICE ENTITLEMENTS
Appears in 1 contract
Samples: Train Operations Agreement
Most Favoured Nation Status. [Delete clause 24.22 where End User is paying all Access Charges]
(a) If the Operator believes on reasonable grounds that:
(i) Aurizon QR Network has entered into an Access Agreement access agreement with another Railway Operator for a Train service that transports the same specified commodity in the same specified geographic area as a Train Service provided in accordance with this Agreement (“Like Train Service”); and
(ii) the access charge Access Charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking, the Operator may provide written notification to Aurizon QR Network which must include the reasons why the Operator considers this to be the case.
(b) Within thirty (30) days of receipt of such notification, Aurizon QR Network must advise the Operator:
(i) whether or not Aurizon QR Network agrees that the Access Agreement access agreement with the other Railway Operator is for a Like Train Service and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon QR Network considers this to be the case;
(ii) if Aurizon QR Network agrees that the Access Agreement access agreement with the other Railway Operator is for a Like Train Service, whether or not Aurizon QR Network agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s the QR Network Access Undertaking and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon QR Network considers that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has not been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation; and
(iii) if Aurizon QR Network agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation then within sixty (60) days of advice provided pursuant to Clause 24.22(b22.22(b) Aurizon QR Network must advise the Operator:
(A) whether or not Aurizon QR Network has been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking; or
(B) if Aurizon QR Network has not been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service that Aurizon QR Network agrees to the reduction of the Access Charge payable by the Operator including the amount of the proposed reduced Access Charge.
(c) If the Operator does not agree with Aurizon QR Network’s response to its notification, the dispute shall be referred to an expert for resolution in accordance with Clause 18.317.3.
(d) If:
(i) another Railway Operator provides Aurizon QR Network with notification that it believes that some or all of the Operator’s Train Services are a Like Train Service to a Train service operated by the other Railway Operator, and that the Access Charge has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking; and
(ii) Aurizon QR Network agrees that this Agreement is for a Like Train Service and that any Access Charge under this Agreement has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking, then Aurizon Network has the right by notice to the Operator to vary the Access Charge such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s Access Undertaking. Executed in Queensland in the presence of: ) Witness Signature Print Name Print Name in the presence of: ) Witness Signature Print Name Print Name
(a) under seal; or
(b) under s127(i) of the Corporations Act; or
(c) under a duly executed Power of Attorney.,
Appears in 1 contract
Samples: Operator Access Agreement
Most Favoured Nation Status. [Delete clause 24.22 where End User is paying all Access Charges]
(a) If the Operator believes on reasonable grounds that:
(i) Aurizon QR Network has entered into an Access Agreement access agreement with another Railway Operator for a Train service that transports the same specified commodity in the same specified geographic area as a Train Service provided in accordance with this Agreement (“Like Train Service”); and
(ii) the access charge Access Charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking, ; the Operator may provide written notification to Aurizon QR Network which must include the reasons why the Operator considers this to be the case.
(b) Within thirty (30) days of receipt of such notification, Aurizon QR Network must advise the Operator:
(i) whether or not Aurizon QR Network agrees that the Access Agreement access agreement with the other Railway Operator is for a Like Train Service and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon QR Network considers this to be the case;
(ii) if Aurizon QR Network agrees that the Access Agreement access agreement with the other Railway Operator is for a Like Train Service, whether or not Aurizon QR Network agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon QR Network considers that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has not been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation; and
(iii) if Aurizon QR Network agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation then within sixty (60) days of advice provided pursuant to Clause 24.22(b22.22(b) Aurizon QR Network must advise the Operator:
(A) whether or not Aurizon QR Network has been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking; or
(B) if Aurizon QR Network has not been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service that Aurizon QR Network agrees to the reduction of the Access Charge payable by the Operator including the amount of the proposed reduced Access Charge.
(c) If the Operator does not agree with Aurizon QR Network’s response to its notification, the dispute shall be referred to an expert the Dispute Managers for resolution in accordance with Clause 18.317.2.
(d) If:
(i) another Railway Operator provides Aurizon QR Network with notification that it believes that some or all of the Operator’s Train Services are a Like Train Service to a Train service operated by the other Railway Operator, and that the Access Charge has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking; and
(ii) Aurizon QR Network agrees that this Agreement is for a Like Train Service and that any Access Charge under this Agreement has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking, ; then Aurizon QR Network has the right by notice to the Operator to vary the Access Charge such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking. Executed in Queensland this day of by a duly authorised officer in the presence of: ) ) ) ) ..............................................................…….. ..............................................................…….. Witness Signature Print ..............................................................…….. Name Print Name of Witness (print) this day of by a duly authorised officer in the presence of: ) ) ) ) ..............................................................…….. ..............................................................…….. Witness Signature Print ..............................................................…….. Name Print Name
of Witness (a) under seal; or
(b) under s127(i) of the Corporations Act; or
(c) under a duly executed Power of Attorney.print)
Appears in 1 contract
Samples: Coal Access Agreement
Most Favoured Nation Status. [Delete clause 24.22 where End User is paying all Access Charges]
(a) If the Operator believes on reasonable grounds that:
(i) Aurizon QR Network has entered into an Access Agreement with another Railway Operator for a Train service that transports the same specified commodity in the same specified geographic area as a Train Service provided in accordance with this Agreement (“Like Train Service”); and
(ii) the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking, the Operator may provide written notification to Aurizon QR Network which must include the reasons why the Operator considers this to be the case.
(b) Within thirty (30) days of receipt of such notification, Aurizon QR Network must advise the Operator:
(i) whether or not Aurizon QR Network agrees that the Access Agreement with the other Railway Operator is for a Like Train Service and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon QR Network considers this to be the case;
(ii) if Aurizon QR Network agrees that the Access Agreement with the other Railway Operator is for a Like Train Service, whether or not Aurizon QR Network agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon QR Network considers that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has not been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation; and
(iii) if Aurizon QR Network agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation then within sixty (60) days of advice provided pursuant to Clause 24.22(b) Aurizon QR Network must advise the Operator:
(A) whether or not Aurizon QR Network has been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking; or
(B) if Aurizon QR Network has not been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service that Aurizon QR Network agrees to the reduction of the Access Charge payable by the Operator including the amount of the proposed reduced Access Charge.
(c) If the Operator does not agree with Aurizon QR Network’s response to its notification, the dispute shall be referred to an expert for resolution in accordance with Clause 18.3.
(d) If:
(i) another Railway Operator provides Aurizon QR Network with notification that it believes that some or all of the Operator’s Train Services are a Like Train Service to a Train service operated by the other Railway Operator, and that the Access Charge has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking; and
(ii) Aurizon QR Network agrees that this Agreement is for a Like Train Service and that any Access Charge under this Agreement has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking, then Aurizon QR Network has the right by notice to the Operator to vary the Access Charge such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking. Executed in Queensland in the presence of: ) Witness Signature Print Name Print Name in the presence of: ) Witness Signature Print Name Print Name
(a) under seal; or
(b) under s127(i) of the Corporations Act; or
(c) under a duly executed Power of Attorney. AARLEG-#21840365-v1-Standard_TOA_for_QCA_Draft_Decision.DOC
Appears in 1 contract
Samples: Train Operations Agreement
Most Favoured Nation Status. [Delete clause 24.22 where End User is paying all Access Charges]
(a) If the Operator believes on reasonable grounds that:
(i) Aurizon QR Network has entered into an Access Agreement with another Railway Operator for a Train service that transports the same specified commodity in the same specified geographic area as a Train Service provided in accordance with this Agreement (“Like Train Service”); and
(ii) the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking, the Operator may provide written notification to Aurizon QR Network which must include the reasons why the Operator considers this to be the case.
(b) Within thirty (30) days of receipt of such notification, Aurizon QR Network must advise the Operator:
(i) whether or not Aurizon QR Network agrees that the Access Agreement with the other Railway Operator is for a Like Train Service and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon QR Network considers this to be the case;
(ii) if Aurizon QR Network agrees that the Access Agreement with the other Railway Operator is for a Like Train Service, whether or not Aurizon QR Network agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking and, if not, the reasons why Aurizon QR Network considers that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has not been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation; and
(iii) if Aurizon QR Network agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation then within sixty (60) days of advice provided pursuant to Clause 24.22(b) Aurizon QR Network must advise the Operator:
(A) whether or not Aurizon QR Network has been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking; or
(B) if Aurizon QR Network has not been able to vary the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service that Aurizon QR Network agrees to the reduction of the Access Charge payable by the Operator including the amount of the proposed reduced Access Charge.
(c) If the Operator does not agree with Aurizon QR Network’s response to its notification, the dispute shall be referred to an expert for resolution in accordance with Clause 18.3.
(d) If:
(i) another Railway Operator provides Aurizon QR Network with notification that it believes that some or all of the Operator’s Train Services are a Like Train Service to a Train service operated by the other Railway Operator, and that the Access Charge has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking; and
(ii) Aurizon QR Network agrees that this Agreement is for a Like Train Service and that any Access Charge under this Agreement has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking, then Aurizon QR Network has the right by notice to the Operator to vary the Access Charge such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon QR Network’s Access Undertaking. Executed in Queensland SIGNED for and on behalf of ) QR NETWORK PTY LTD ) in the presence of: ) Witness Signature Print Name Print Name in the presence of: ) Witness Signature Print Name Print Name
(a) under seal; or
(b) under s127(i) of the Corporations Act; or
(c) under a duly executed Power of Attorney.
Appears in 1 contract
Samples: Train Operations Agreement
Most Favoured Nation Status. [Delete clause 24.22 where End User is paying all Access Charges]
(a) If the Operator The Access Holder may (acting reasonably) notify Queensland Rail that it believes on reasonable grounds that:
(i) Aurizon Network Queensland Rail has entered into an Access Agreement access agreement with another Railway Operator Network Participant for a Train service that transports whose characteristics are alike and are provided to service the same specified commodity in the same specified geographic area end market as a Train Service is provided in accordance with this Agreement (“Like Train Service”); andand
(ii) the access charge charges applicable to the Like Train Service has have been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s provisions under the relevant Access Undertaking, ’s pricing principles that applied to the Operator may development of those access charges (Price Differentiation Provisions), and provide written notification to Aurizon Network which must include the Queensland Rail with reasons why the Operator Access Xxxxxx considers this to be the case.
(b) Within thirty (30) days of receipt of 20 Business Days after receiving such notificationa notice, Aurizon Network Queensland Rail must advise notify the Operator:Access Holder:
(i) whether or not Aurizon Network it agrees that the Access Agreement access agreement with the other Railway Operator Network Participant is for a Like Train Service andincluding, if notit does not agree, the reasons why Aurizon Network considers this to be the case;its reasons; and
(ii) if Aurizon Network agrees that the Access Agreement where it does agree with the other Railway Operator is for a Like Train Servicematter in clause 27.20(b)(i), whether or not Aurizon Network it agrees that the access charge charges applicable to the Like Train Service has have been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s Access Undertaking andPrice Differentiation Provisions including, if notit does not agree, the reasons why Aurizon Network considers that the access charge applicable its reasons.
(c) Within 40 Business Days after giving a notice under clause 27.20(b) agreeing to the Like Train Service has not been developed matter in contravention of clause 27.20(b)(ii), Queensland Rail must notify the limits on price differentiation; andAccess Holder:
(iii) if Aurizon Network agrees that the access charge applicable to the Like Train Service has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation then within sixty (60) days of advice provided pursuant to Clause 24.22(b) Aurizon Network must advise the Operator:
(Ai) whether or not Aurizon Network Queensland Rail has been able to vary the access charge charges applicable to the Like Train Service such that it no longer contravenes to rectify the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s Access Undertakingcontravention of the Price Differentiation Provisions; or
(Bii) if Aurizon Network where Queensland Rail has not been able to vary the those access charge applicable to the Like Train Service charges, that Aurizon Network Queensland Rail agrees to the reduction of vary the Access Charge payable by to rectify the Operator including the amount contravention of the proposed reduced Price Differentiation Provisions including how the Access ChargeCharge will be varied.
(cd) If the Operator does Access Holder (acting reasonably) is not agree satisfied with Aurizon NetworkQueensland Rail’s response to its notificationresponses under clauses 27.20(b) or 27.20(c), the dispute shall must be referred to an expert Expert for resolution in accordance with Clause 18.3clause 19.3 (subject to any other dispute resolution process otherwise agreed by the Parties to the Dispute (in each Party’s absolute discretion)).
(de) If:
(i) another Railway Operator provides Aurizon Network with notification Participant notifies Queensland Rail that it believes believes:
(A) that some or all of the Operator’s Train Services has characteristics that are a Like Train Service alike and are provided to service the same end market as a Train service operated by the that other Railway Operator, and Network Participant is operated; and
(B) that the Access Charge has Charges for those Train Services have been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s Price Differentiation Provisions under the relevant Access Undertaking’s pricing principles that applied to the development of the Access Charges; andand
(ii) Aurizon Queensland Rail agrees with the matters referred to in clauses 27.20(e)(i)(A) and 27.20(e)(i)(B), then Queensland Rail may notify the Access Holder varying the Access Charge to rectify the relevant contravention.
(f) In this clause 27.20, a reference to the Access Charges, or the access charges applicable to another Network agrees that this Agreement is Participant’s Train service, includes the methodology, rates and other inputs used to calculate those Access Charges or access charges, as applicable.
(g) This clause 27.20 only applies in relation to an access agreement or access charges for a Like Train Service and where that any Access Charge under access agreement was entered into by the relevant parties after the date of this Agreement has been developed in contravention of the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s Access Undertaking, then Aurizon Network has the right by notice to the Operator to vary the Access Charge such that it no longer contravenes the limits on price differentiation set out in Aurizon Network’s Access Undertaking. Executed in Queensland in the presence of: ) Witness Signature Print Name Print Name in the presence of: ) Witness Signature Print Name Print Name
(a) under seal; or
(b) under s127(i) of the Corporations Act; or
(c) under a duly executed Power of Attorneyagreement.
Appears in 1 contract
Samples: Access Agreement
