Vodacom Loses Court Case Over Spectrum Pooling

Vodacom South Africa has suffered a significant setback in its legal battle over spectrum pooling, as the Pretoria High Court dismissed its urgent application to stop competitors MTN, Cell C, and Liquid Intelligent Technologies from sharing spectrum.

This ruling comes as part of an ongoing dispute over whether the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa (Icasa) lawfully approved these pooling arrangements. The case has drawn attention across the telecom industry, raising questions about competition, fairness, and public benefit.

Vodacom argued that the spectrum pooling agreements were secretly and unlawfully approved by Icasa, giving MTN a competitive edge in network quality. According to Vodacom, these deals allowed MTN and its partners to use high-demand spectrum (HDS) without proper licensing, violating the Electronic Communications Act.

Vodacom claimed this unfairly boosted MTN’s network performance while harming its own competitive position. The company sought an urgent interdict to suspend these agreements until the court could rule on their legality.

Despite acknowledging Vodacom’s concerns, Judge Etienne Labuschagne dismissed the application with costs, stating that Vodacom failed to justify immediate intervention. The court recognized that Vodacom had valid grounds to challenge the approval process, particularly regarding the use of “guard bands”—small portions of unused spectrum meant to prevent interference. However, Judge Labuschagne emphasized that halting spectrum pooling would harm millions of South Africans who currently benefit from improved mobile network quality.

The judge highlighted that spectrum pooling has enhanced access to fast and reliable communication services, benefiting education, trade, and information access nationwide. Blocking these arrangements would disrupt public services and investments made by MTN and Cell C based on Icasa’s approvals. Since these companies acted in good faith, dismantling their agreements would be unfair at this stage.

Vodacom’s loss over spectrum pooling also revealed flaws in Icasa’s decision-making process. The court criticized Icasa for failing to involve the public or conduct a thorough competition assessment that considered Vodacom’s objections. While this strengthened Vodacom’s case for challenging the legality of spectrum pooling in future proceedings, it was not enough to secure an interim interdict.

Interestingly, the court noted that Vodacom could apply for its own spectrum pooling agreements under similar conditions. This raises questions about why Vodacom has not pursued this route while continuing its legal fight. For now, the ruling maintains the status quo, allowing MTN, Cell C, and Liquid Intelligent Technologies to continue their arrangements until further court decisions.

This outcome marks a significant moment in South Africa’s telecom landscape. While Vodacom’s spectrum loss highlights competitive tensions among operators, it also underscores broader issues around regulation and fairness in managing scarce resources like HDS. As the legal battle continues, its implications could reshape how spectrum is allocated and shared in the country.

For now, Vodacom loses over spectrum pooling but remains determined to challenge what it sees as an unfair advantage granted to its rivals. The next phase of this legal fight will likely determine whether Icasa’s approvals stand or if changes are needed to ensure a level playing field for all operators.

Was this information useful? Drop a nice comment below. You can also check out other useful contents by following us on X/Twitter @siliconafritech, Instagram @Siliconafricatech, or Facebook @SiliconAfrica.