The Supreme Court granted the application of an interest group challenging the Court of Appeals’ affirmance permitting Detroit Edison to issue a prospective rebate to its customers to refund a prior unapproved rate increase. Our July 2012 post on the Court of Appeals’ decision affirming the prospective rebate, and the dissent arguing that it was not permitted because it was contrary to the plain language of the statute at issue, can be found here.
Detroit Edison had implemented a rate hike to customers prior to receipt of Michigan Public Service Commission approval. When only part of the rate increase was approved, Detroit Edison wanted to refund the overcharge by crediting a future bill. The Association of Businesses Advocating Tariff Equity (ABATE) argued that such a refund was impermissible under the applicable statute and failed to compensate past customers who paid the unapproved additional charges.