Second, Telenor`s interpretation defines “control” more reasonably. Ownership is not the only way for one person or individual to control another person. Contractual agreements, such as shareholder agreements, employment contracts or agency contracts or other commercial contracts, can allow one company to exercise considerable power over another. It is not consistent with the objective of the presumption of competition for the alfa group parties to prohibit holding, directly or indirectly, shares in a competing telecommunications undertaking, but controlling another nature or organisation which was their puppet for a reason other than ownership. Telenor`s interpretation is the most reasonable. First, the “contractual or other” interpretation proposed by the Altimo entities gives an unpleasant and narrow meaning. The specification of ownership shares as “ownership of securities or partnerships or other ownership” is clear in itself. The addition of the phrase “contractual or otherwise” gives little, if any, clarity to the extent of ownership shares. It also indicates that ownership shares normally result from a contract, but in fact they are more often the result of holding shares or a partnership than of the contract. Moreover, apart from ownership, partnership and contract, it is not clear that ownership interests could arise “otherwise”. Read as altimo entities want, the expression is either redundant or occult and adds to the definition only confusion.
The exact uses of the property are defined in consultation. All parts and areas of the site used and used for production purposes are defined in the agreement. A lot of capital and other resources are involved in business transactions….Share