SOMBA K'E/YELLOWKNIFE - Bell Mobility customers will have to wait for the decision of a territorial Supreme Court judge on whether or not they can join a lawsuit against the phone company over a 911 service fee paid when there is no service.

Justice R.S Veale reserved his decision on Wednesday for a later date to review the cases made by Bell Mobility and James Anderson, the complainant in the $6-million case against the national cellphone service provider.

Anderson is arguing residents of the NWT, and, if the case is certified as a class action lawsuit, other Bell customers in areas without 911 service, should be compensated for paying a service fee that doesn't benefit them. Bell charges 75 cents per month in the NWT, although it is now a hidden cost.

Bell Mobility said in Supreme Court last week it has followed through on its contractual agreement to provide 911 service adding certifying the case as a class action suit should not be done.

Robert Deane, Bell's lawyer, said the company provides the infrastructure needed for local government's to offer 911 and it isn't up to the company to provide a live operator.

Bell provides call routing for any calls made to 911 and after that is done, it's left to local governments to determine how the call is answered - and in this case, NWT communities with cell phone service choose to use an automated message to tell people 911 is not offered and for callers to call their local emergency number or dial 0.

"They chose to make a recording available," Deane said, stating the company processes all 911 calls it receives. "They have access to what the local government provides."

Deane said Bell Mobility has in place the infrastructure to offer 911 service in the NWT, but because there is no Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP) the calls end up at the answering machine.

"Bell Mobility provides what it set out to provide," Deane said.

Justice R.S. Veale heard from Sam Marr, one of Anderson's lawyers, who said allowing the class action lawsuit certification would open the doors of justice to other complainants, adding "injuries are left unremedied" and the case "could never be litigated" if it's not done as a class action lawsuit.

"If you live here and reside here you're not getting any benefit from paying," Marr said, adding it's as easy as black and white. "Either you're connected to a live operator or you're not."

During his submissions, Deane said the case could not be certified as a class action lawsuit because interpretation of the 911 service fee could be different for every person who signed a wireless contract with Bell. Anderson's lawyers estimate some 50,000 people could file with the class action lawsuit if the judge agrees to proceed that way.

"These unnamed, unknown third parties ... their claims can not fairly be bound to Mr. Anderson's claims," Deane said, adding the 911 service fee does not state a live operator will be provided through dialling the emergency number, but only the routing of 911 calls to what is offered by local governments.

Speaking outside the courthouse during a break in the case, Anderson said he was curious as to why Bell removed the 911 fee late last year, burying it in their wireless plan. He said the company is making millions "on the backs of people a little bit at a time."

"You lose precious time when you get a recording to call another number," he said, referring to a Yellowknife couple in 2008 who tried to call 911 after falling through the ice in their truck. "The urgency, the emergency has already transpired."