The SP AusNet contract framework described above indicates the form of individual contracts we have for the group of customers who are not covered by the « basic level » agreements. As a result, about 10% of electricity relations are linked to specific connection contracts (link services – specific delivery services – as delivery services) which contain certain elements of the proposal and agreement, but which are in fact a standard contract for the corresponding connection agreement and 1% are fully negotiated contracts. For gas, as indicated by DPI, contracts are concluded between the distributor and the customer, but we expect 90-95% of them to be done through the retailer`s standard service offer. The remaining 5% would require a specific link contract, which could be provided with a service element. For these is the contract through the distributor, but the aspects of network connection and delivery service are provided to the distributor by the merchant, and it is the distributor who has the greatest dependence on the customer who fulfills his obligations related to the service. As stated in the DPI document and as stated in the above summary of our current customer contracts, we do not have transaction contracts with our gas customers. Although SP AusNet has not conducted a detailed analysis of the potential impact, we believe that there are identification documents from our internal assessment that suggest that there are probably sufficient inconsistencies between our current relationships with clients and the NECF framework to create problems and implications for this relationship. 5.6 If the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (or similar legislation) applies to this agreement (or similar legislation) and authorizes the limitation of liability for breach of the statutory guarantee, AusNet Services` liability, in the choice of AusNet services, is limited to the delivery of services or the payment of the re-delivery of services. Prioritizing the NECF provisions in the event of disagreement with existing contracts would require distributors (and probably also the gas distributor) to review in detail each of these contracts that were not based exclusively on the follow-up contract.