The court undertook an enquiry as to damages: ‘(1) Damages were to be assessed liberally on the basis of such inferences as the evidence justified.
(2) Damages were to be assessed by reference to two periods, November 1992 to February 1996 and March 1996 to March 1997. The difference between them is that in the latter period but not the former Mr Blayney was incorporating Welsh gold which the judge considered to be an important selling point.
(3) Damages were to be assessed by reference to the profit Mr Blayney would have made in respect of such of the sales of infringing articles effected by Clogau as he could show he would have made but for the infringement.
(4) In the absence of any evidence as to an appropriate rate of royalty for sales of infringing articles by Clogau which Mr Blayney could not show he would have made but for the infringement Mr Blayney was not entitled to damages.
(5) Mr Blayney had not made out a case for an award of additional damages under s.97(2) Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988.’
Judges:
Kim Lewison QC
Citations:
[2002] FSR 14
Statutes:
Copyright Designs & Patents Act 1988
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal from – Blayney (T/A Aardvark Jewelry) v Clogau St David’s Gold Mines Ltd and others CA 16-Jul-2002
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Damages, Intellectual Property
Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.276907