Supreme Court affirms pipeline value decision
Headline Legal News
The Alaska Supreme Court on Wednesday handed Alaska municipalities a victory in a dispute over the value of the trans-Alaska pipeline, affirming that the structure for 2006 should have been valued at nearly $10 billion, not the $850 million claimed by pipeline owners.
The justices backed a Superior Court ruling that based the value of the pipeline on replacement costs, not fees paid to the owners for use of the pipeline.
The higher value means more tax revenue for municipalities through which the pipeline runs, especially the North Slope Borough, the Fairbanks North Star Borough and the city of Valdez, the parties in the lawsuit. The municipalities have long argued that pipeline owners have undervalued the 800-mile pipeline and tanker-loading facilities in Valdez.
"I've got a smile on my face today," Fairbanks North Star Borough Mayor Luke Hopkins said. "The Supreme Court validated what our position has been all along."
State Rep. Dave Guttenberg, D-Fairbanks, in a prepared statement praised the municipalities for seeking additional revenue and faulted the state for not intervening.
Related listings
-
Australian court rules ANZ Bank late fees too high
Headline Legal News 02/06/2014One of Australia's largest banks faces a multimillion dollar payout to thousands of customers after a judge ruled on Wednesday that late payment fees it charged on credit cards were exorbitant. ANZ Banking Group Ltd. partially lost a class action law...
-
Pakistan court dismisses Musharraf medical request
Headline Legal News 02/03/2014A Pakistani court hearing the case against former military ruler Pervez Musharraf on charges of high treason rejected Friday a request that he be allowed to go abroad for treatment, his lawyer and a court official said. Instead, they said, it issued ...
-
Supreme Court debates 'straw purchasers' gun law
Headline Legal News 01/24/2014The Supreme Court on Wednesday debated whether a Virginia man who bought a gun for a relative in Pennsylvania can be considered an illegal straw purchaser when both men were legally eligible to purchase firearms. The justices heard an appeal from Bru...