Carrying channels 7 and 9 have "public value" and CableVision should be required to carry them, argued Larry Mussenden, lawyer for the Telecommunications Commission.

In Supreme Court on Friday, Mr. Mussenden told Chief Justice Richard Ground the cable company needed the commission's permission before changing its services and dropping channels was clearly a change in service.

He said the company was a specified carrier who dominates the market with its 20,000 plus subscribers.

"That's not a small number. Perhaps a huge chunk of the pie", the lawyer added.

The row began on November 30 when CableVision announced its plans to dump BBC channels 7 and 9 because the BBC intended to charge a fee for carrying ZBM and ZFB even though the channels have aired without charge for years.

Mr. Mussenden argued is there a decision by the commission that can be judicially reviewed, does the commission have the discretion to determine whether or not CableVision can discontinue its service, can the commission decide on a price for the new service, is CableVision barred from discontinuing the channels while waiting for a decision and what would the next step be.

He said: "You don't want to carry channels 7 and 9. Fine, don't carry channels 7 and 9. However, we at the commission think there is public value in carrying channels 7 and nine."

On Thursday, Eugene Johnston, attorney for BBC said CableVision was wrong for bringing the dispute to court and should have waited for a decision by the commission.

CableVision claims if it continues to carry the channels, it could face copyright suits not only from BBC but also American broadcast stations where the programming came from.

Narinder Hargun, attorney for CableVision also said the new act passed in July said the company didn't have to carry the channels.

Telecommunications lawyer Melvin Douglas said its position in the letter it sent to CableVision and BBC was "an advisory and it was not amenable to judicial review".

The hearing will resume today.