ECJ Judgment Of The Court – Appeal – Community trade mark – Invalidity proceedings – Figurative mark representing a locking device – No distinctive character – Partial invalidity – Regulation (EC) No 40/94 – Article 7(1)(b)
Fernlund P
C-97/12, [2014] EUECJ C-97/12
European
Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.525530
[2012] UKIntelP o27512
England and Wales
Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.465270
The applicant appealed rejection of its application for a patent for a method and apparatus for modelling synthetic crystalline structures. The apparatus would involve (indeed consist of) a computer programmed for the task.
Held: A pure software application or method did not become registrable merely because it took control of a computer screen; it was still software. It was in substance a method of performing a mental act since the result depended on the personal skill and assessment of the user in selecting certain criteria for the modelling process.
Laddie J
Times 18-Jun-1996, [1996] RPC 511
England and Wales
Appeal from – In Re Patent Application No 9204959 by Fujitsu Ltd CA 14-Mar-1997
A computer program modelling a crystal structure is not patentable; it was not a hardware function, and software is not capable of protection under Patents law. Aldous LJ repeated his concern at the so called ‘technical contribution test’ for . .
Cited – Aerotel Ltd v Telco Holdings Ltd and others, In re Patent Application GB 0314464.9 in the name of Neal Macrossan Rev 1 CA 27-Oct-2006
In each case it was said that the requested patent concerned an invention consisting of a computer program, and was not therefore an invention and was unpatentable. In one case a patent had been revoked on being challenged, and in the other, the . .
Cited – Blacklight Power Inc v The Comptroller-General of Patents PatC 18-Nov-2008
The applicant appealed against the refusal of two patents by the respondent.
Held: The standard of proof to be applied on objections to patentability was the same which applied when testing for exclusions. The standard was the balance of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.81676
A patent was granted for a product, produced by the bacterium streptomyces hygroscopicus, called rapamycin, which was useful to suppress transplant rejection. Because rapamycin was a known product at the priority date, it could not be patented: neither could its use as a treatment, because that would offend section 4(2) of the Patents Act 1977. The claim was for a specific type. Claims for infringement and cross claims for invalidity were heard.
Held: The patent had been infringed and the allegation of insufficiency failed. The court refused to make a declaration of non-infringement as sought.
Laddie J
[2000] RPC 547
England and Wales
Appeal from – American Home Products Corporation, Professor Roy Calne v Novartis Pharmaceuticals UK Limited, Novartis Pharma AG CA 27-Jul-2000
The invention was a second medical use for a known drug rapamycin, which was found to have an immuno-suppressive effect. The court asked whether a claim to rapamycin should be construed to include derivatives.
Held: A person skilled in the art . .
Cited – Kirin-Amgen Inc and others v Hoechst Marion Roussel Limited and others etc HL 21-Oct-2004
The claims arose in connection with the validity and alleged infringement of a European Patent on erythropoietin (‘EPO’).
Held: ‘Construction is objective in the sense that it is concerned with what a reasonable person to whom the utterance . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.218737
A five year supplemental patent was calculated from the date of the first patent, and not later.
Times 27-Mar-1996
England and Wales
Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.81691
Patten J
[2008] EWHC 1174 (Ch)
England and Wales
Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.268730
There can be no copyright in a name as such; ‘Elvis’ insufficiently distinctive for a Trade Mark.
Times 25-Mar-1997
England and Wales
Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.81696
The claimant alleged passing off and trade mark infringement in respect of its sign ‘STALKER’ as applied to angling goods.
Birss QC J
[2010] EWPCC 30
England and Wales
Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.448082
Matter referred to ECJ. The claimants sougt to restraiin alleged breach of database rights by the defendants in lists of Football League fixtures.
[2011] EWCA Civ 330
England and Wales
Appeal from – Football Dataco Ltd and Others v Sportradar Gmbh and Another ChD 17-Nov-2010
The claimants complained of alleged breach of database rights claimed by the claimants in their lists of football match schedules. . .
At CA – Football Dataco Ltd and Others v Sportradar Gmbh and Another ChD 8-May-2012
. .
Reference – Football Dataco Ltd and Others v Sportradar Gmbh and Another ECJ 21-Jun-2012
ECJ (Opinion) Directive 96/9/EC – Legal protection of databases – Concepts of extraction and re-utilisation – Location of the act of re-utilisation . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.431246
ECFI Non-contractual liability – Tendering for a project concerning the maintenance and strengthening of the language machine translation system of the Commission – Source codes of a computer program marketed – Infringement of copyright – Unauthorized disclosure of know-how – Action for damages – non-contractual disputes – Admissibility – Damage and some real – Causation – Evaluation of flat amount of damage.
T-19/07, [2010] EUECJ T-19/07
European
Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.427730
Fysh QC J
[2009] EWHC 3294 (Ch)
England and Wales
See Also – Football Dataco Ltd and Others v Brittens Pools Ltd (In Action 3222) and Others ChD 23-Apr-2010
The court considered what rights existed in the annual football fixture lists created by the claimants. The claimants said that the list was created only with a considerable effort applying certain rules. The defendants denied that any copyright . .
See Also – Football Dataco Ltd and Others v Yahoo! UK Ltd and Others CA 9-Dec-2010
The claimants asserted ownership of copyright in football fixture lists as a database right. The defendant denied that they attracted any such right. The judge had found that significant skill and labour went into the preparation of the list.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.401889
The claimants complained of alleged breach of database rights claimed by the claimants in their lists of football match schedules.
Floyd J
[2010] EWHC 2911 (Ch), [2011] ECDR 2, [2011] FSR 10, [2011] ECC 16
Directive 96/9/EC on the Legal Protection of Databases
England and Wales
Appeal from – Football Dataco Ltd and Others v Sportradar Gmbh and Another CA 29-Mar-2011
Matter referred to ECJ. The claimants sougt to restraiin alleged breach of database rights by the defendants in lists of Football League fixtures. . .
See Also – Football Dataco Ltd and Others v Sportradar Gmbh and Another ChD 8-May-2012
. .
At first instance – Football Dataco Ltd and Others v Sportradar Gmbh and Another ECJ 21-Jun-2012
ECJ (Opinion) Directive 96/9/EC – Legal protection of databases – Concepts of extraction and re-utilisation – Location of the act of re-utilisation . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.426061
The claimants asserted ownership of copyright in football fixture lists as a database right. The defendant denied that they attracted any such right. The judge had found that significant skill and labour went into the preparation of the list.
Held: The appeal failed in general, but the court referred a limited questiion to the ECJ as to whether the Directive replaced or was additional to any existing national copyrights in such works.
Jacob, Hooper, Rimer LJJ
[2011] RPC 9, [2010] EWCA Civ 1380
Database Directive (96/9/EC), Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988
England and Wales
Appeal from – Football Dataco Ltd and Others v Brittens Pools Ltd (In Action 3222) and Others ChD 23-Apr-2010
The court considered what rights existed in the annual football fixture lists created by the claimants. The claimants said that the list was created only with a considerable effort applying certain rules. The defendants denied that any copyright . .
Mentioned – Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Century Life Plc CA 19-Dec-2000
The Directive required member states to exempt from VAT, services involving the provision of insurance, and for intermediaries. Following the Regulator’s involvement, the principal company had to arrange for the checking of existing policies, and . .
Cited – Fixtures Marketing v Oy Veikkaus Ab ECJ 9-Nov-2004
Europa Directive 96/9/EC – Legal protection of databases – Sui generis right – Definition of investment in the obtaining, verification or presentation of the contents of a database – Football fixture lists – . .
Cited – Fixtures Marketing v Organismos prognostikon agonon podosfairou AE (OPAP) ECJ 9-Nov-2004
ECJ The term database as defined in Article 1(2) of Directive 96/9/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 1996 on the legal protection of databases refers to any collection of works, data or . .
Cited – Fixtures Marketing v Svenska ECJ 9-Nov-2004
ECJ (Approximation of Laws) Directive 96/9/EC – Legal protection of databases – Sui generis right – Definition of investment in the obtaining, verification or presentation of the contents of a database – Football . .
See Also – Football Dataco Ltd and Others v Brittens Pools Ltd and Others ChD 26-Nov-2009
. .
Cited – Forensic Telecommunications Services Ltd v West Yorkshire Police and Another ChD 9-Nov-2011
The claimant alleged infringement by the defendant of assorted intellectual property rights in its database. It provided systems for recovering materials deleted from Nokia mobile phones.
Held: ‘the present case is concerned with a collection . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.426999
Mann J
[2004] EWHC 3440 (Ch)
England and Wales
Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.346730
Action brought by the claimant for the revocation of European patent
David Young QC HHJ
[2004] EWHC 1487 (Ch)
England and Wales
Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.346725
ECJ Community trade mark – ‘Opposition proceedings’ – Application for the Community word mark ARCOL – ‘ Earlier Community word mark CAPOL Implementation by OHIM of a judgment annulling a decision of one of its Boards of Appeal Relative ground for refusal No likelihood of confusion Rights of the defence Article 8(1)(b), Article 61(2), Article 63(6), Article 73, second sentence, and Article 74(2) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94.
T-402/07, [2009] EUECJ T-402/07
Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.328032
ECFI Community trade mark Opposition proceedings Application for Community word mark BUDWEISER Earlier international word and figurative marks BUDWEISER and Budweiser Budvar Relative grounds for refusal Article 8(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 Genuine use of the earlier trade mark Article 43(2) and (3) of Regulation No 40/94 Infringement of rights of defence Statement of reasons Article 73 of Regulation No 40/94 Late submission of documents Discretion granted by Article 74(2) of Regulation No 40/94.
T-191/07, [2009] EUECJ T-191/07
Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.328012
Copyright in private letters remained even after transmission and an injunction could be granted to prevent further repubication. However here where the defendant was relying upon the letters to disprove false allegations made against him, that copyright dissolved.
[1813] EngR 380, (1813) 2 Ves and Bea 19, (1813) 35 ER 225
England and Wales
Cited – Prince Albert v Strange ChD 8-Feb-1849
The Prince sought to restrain publication of otherwise unpublished private etchings and lists of works by Queen Victoria. The etchings appeared to have been removed surreptitiously from or by one Brown. A personal confidence was claimed.
Held: . .
Cited – HRH The Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Ltd ChD 11-Feb-2021
Defence had no prospect of success – Struck Out
The claimant complained that the defendant newspaper had published contents from a letter she had sent to her father. The court now considered her claims in breach of privacy and copyright, and her request for summary judgment.
Held: Warby J . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.338145
ECJ Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the Community word mark SPA THERAPY – Earlier national word mark SPA – Relative ground for refusal Likelihood of confusion Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94.
T-109/07, [2009] EUECJ T-109/07
Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.328033
The bank sought continuation of an injunction preventing publication by the defendant of papers leaked to relating to the claimant’s tax management. The claimant claimed in confidentiality. The papers did not reveal any unlawful activity. The defendant paper argued that the documents having been already disclosed, no confidentiality remained in them.
Held: Despite the publication, the claimant had an arguable case that confidence in the documents continued. However, had the full details been made available to the court on the original application, the court would not have granted the injunction. The injunction was continued but limited to restrict only the publication of the documents themselves without the claimant’s consent and whether in whole or in part.
Blake J
[2009] EWHC 591 (QB)
Cited – Attorney-General v Guardian Newspapers Ltd (No 2) (‘Spycatcher’) HL 13-Oct-1988
Loss of Confidentiality Protection – public domain
A retired secret service employee sought to publish his memoirs from Australia. The British government sought to restrain publication there, and the defendants sought to report those proceedings, which would involve publication of the allegations . .
Cited – Northern Rock Plc v The Financial Times Ltd and Another QBD 16-Nov-2007
The court was asked whether information remained confidential after its publication on a web-site.
Held: The court contrasted publication briefly on a web site which would not be generally accessible or used by the general public, and more . .
Cited – Cream Holdings Limited and others v Banerjee and others HL 14-Oct-2004
On her dismissal from the claimant company, Ms Banerjee took confidential papers revealing misconduct to the local newspaper, which published some. The claimant sought an injunction to prevent any further publication. The defendants argued that the . .
Cited – Imutran Ltd v Uncaged Campaigns Ltd and Another ChD 11-Jan-2001
The test for whether an interim injunction should be granted restraining publication of material claimed to be confidential, where such a grant would infringe the right to freedom of expression was slightly different under the 1998 Act. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.326984
The applicants appealed against rejection of their claims for patents under section 1(2) of the 1977 Act.
Lewison J
[2009] EWHC 343 (Pat), [2009] Bus LR D51, [2009] FSR 19
England and Wales
Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.317963
Arnold J
[2009] EWHC 336 (Pat)
Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.311797
[2009] EWHC 102 (Pat)
England and Wales
Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.311793
[2009] EWHC 213 (Pat)
England and Wales
Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.311796
The object of 8 Anne, c. 19, was to encourage literature among British subjects, which description includes such foreigners as, by residence here, owe the Crown a temporary allegiance; and any such foreigner, first publishing his work here, is an ‘author’ within the meaning of the statute, no matter where his work was composed, or whether he came here solely with a view to its publication.
Copyright commences by publication; if at that time the foreign author is not in this country, he is not a person whom the statute meant to protect.
An Englishman, though resident abroad, will have copyright in a work of his own first published in this country.
B, a foreign musical composer, resident at that time in his own country, assigned to R, another foreigner, also resident there, according to the law of their country, his right in a musical composition of which he was the author, and which was then unpublished. The assignee brought the composition to this country, and, before publication, assigned it, according to the form required by the law of this country, to an Englishman. The first publication, took place in this country :
Held, reversing the judgment of the Court of Exchequer Chamber, that the foreign assignee had not, by the law of this country, any assignable copyright here in this musical composition.
Per Lords Brougham and St. Leonards.-Copyright did not exist at common law; it is the creature of statute.
Brougham, St Leonard LL
[1854] EngR 816, (1854) 4 HLC 815, (1854) 10 ER 681, [1854] UKPC 28
Appeal from – Boosey v Jefferys 20-May-1851
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.293673
Cross appeals from refusal of declaration of non-infringement and of invalidity of patent for lack of novelty and obviousness.
Chadwick, Jacob, Neuerger LJJ
[2006] EWCA Civ 876
England and Wales
Appeal from – Ranbaxy UK Ltd and Another v Warner-Lambert Company PatC 12-Oct-2005
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.242972
(US Second Circuit) The judge discussed the difficulty in copyright cases in drawing the line between the taking of general concepts and copying in an infringing manner: ‘Upon any work, and especially upon a play, a great number of patterns of increasing generality will fit equally well, as more and more of the incident is left out. The last may perhaps be no more than the most general statement of what the play is about, and at times may consist of only its title; but there is a point in this series of abstractions where they are no longer protected, since otherwise the playwright could prevent the use of his ‘ideas’, to which, apart from their expression, his property is never extended.’
Learned Hand J
45 F 2nd 119 (2nd Cir 1930)
United States
Cited – IPC Media Ltd v Highbury-Leisure Publishing Ltd ChD 21-Dec-2004
The claimant magazine publisher alleged breach of copyright by the defendant in their magazine, as to the cover page designs used. It was not clear just which cover was said to have been copied.
Held: The first step in a copyright action is . .
Cited – Ibcos Computers Ltd v Barclays Mercantile Highland Finance Ltd ChD 1994
In cases of claimed copyright infringement, it is not the function of the expert to decide the question of substantiality. In cases of simple visual comparison the court can and should do the visual comparison for itself. A distinction between the . .
Cited – HRH The Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Ltd ChD 11-Feb-2021
Defence had no prospect of success – Struck Out
The claimant complained that the defendant newspaper had published contents from a letter she had sent to her father. The court now considered her claims in breach of privacy and copyright, and her request for summary judgment.
Held: Warby J . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.231501
The claimant sought to restrain publication by the defendant of a book recounting very personal events in her life. She claimed privacy and a right of confidence. The defendant argued that there was a public interest in the disclosures.
Held: Documents showed a readiness in the defendant to seek to manipulate the claimant through threats of publicising matters which she knew would cause the claimant acute embarrassment. The publication could not claim any purpose of public interest disclosure. Certain details published were very intrusive and private, and the claimant was entitled to an injunction to restrain publication of certain parts of the book, and a low level of damages: ‘for a claimant’s conduct to ‘trigger the public interest defence’ a very high degree of misbehaviour must be demonstrated. Relatively trivial matters, even though falling short of the highest standards people might set for themselves, will not suffice.’
Eady J said: ‘To describe a person’s home, the decor, the layout, the state of cleanliness, or how the occupiers behave inside it, is generally regarded as unacceptable. To convey such details, without permission, to the general public, is almost as objectionable as spying into the home with a long distance lens and publishing the resulting photographs.’
and: ‘ . . in broad terms, . . if a person wishes to reveal publicly information about aspects of his or her relations with other people, which would attract the prima facie protection of privacy rights, any such revelation should be crafted, so far as possible, to protect the other person’s privacy . . . It does not follow, because one can reveal one’s own private life, that one can also expose confidential matters in respect of which others are entitled to protection if their consent is not forthcoming’.
Eady J
[2006] EMLR 10, [2005] EWHC 3003 (QB)
England and Wales
Cited – Leary v Britiah Broadcasting Corporatin CA 29-Sep-1989
Lord Donaldson MR considered an application for an injunction to prevent a publication which it was said would create a contempt of court, and said: ‘I am very concerned that no one should think that on a speculative basis you can go to the courts . .
Cited – Douglas, Zeta Jones, Northern and Shell Plc v Hello! Limited (No 1) CA 21-Dec-2000
The first two claimants sold exclusive rights to photograph their wedding to the third claimant. A paparrazzi infiltrated the wedding and then sold his unauthorised photographs to the defendants, who now appealed injunctions restraining them from . .
Cited – Von Hannover v Germany ECHR 24-Jun-2004
Princess Caroline of Monaco who had, at some time, received considerable attention in the media throughout Europe, complained at the publication of photographs taken of her withour her permission.
Held: There was no doubt that the publication . .
Cited – Campbell v Mirror Group Newspapers Ltd (MGN) (No 1) HL 6-May-2004
The claimant appealed against the denial of her claim that the defendant had infringed her right to respect for her private life. She was a model who had proclaimed publicly that she did not take drugs, but the defendant had published a story . .
Cited – PG and JH v The United Kingdom ECHR 25-Sep-2001
The use of covert listening devices within a police station was an infringement of the right to privacy, since there was no system of law regulating such practices. That need not affect the right to a fair trial. The prosecution had a duty to . .
Cited – Peck v The United Kingdom ECHR 28-Jan-2003
peck_ukECHR2003
The claimant had been filmed by CCTV. He had, after attempting suicide, left home with a knife, been arrested by the police and disarmed, but then sent home without charge. The CCTV film was used on several occasions to advertise the effectiveness . .
Cited – Tammer v Estonia ECHR 6-Feb-2001
Freedom of expression constitutes one of the essential foundations of a democratic society and one of the basic conditions for its progress and the self-fulfilment of each individual. Criminal penalties imposed in respect of the reporting of a . .
Cited – A v B plc and Another (Flitcroft v MGN Ltd) CA 11-Mar-2002
A newspaper company appealed against an order preventing it naming a footballer who, they claimed, had been unfaithful to his wife.
Held: There remains a distinction between the right of privacy which attaches to sexual activities within and . .
Cited – Coco v A N Clark (Engineers) Ltd ChD 1968
Requirememts to prove breach of confidence
A claim was made for breach of confidence in respect of technical information whose value was commercial.
Held: Megarry J set out three elements which will normally be required if, apart from contract, a case of breach of confidence is to . .
Cited – Beckham v Gibson QBD 29-Apr-2005
The protection of the law of confidence would be illusory if a claimant, in relation to a long and garbled story, was obliged to spell out which of the revelations are accepted as true, and which are said to be false or distorted. . .
Cited – Attorney-General v Guardian Newspapers Ltd (No 2) (‘Spycatcher’) HL 13-Oct-1988
Loss of Confidentiality Protection – public domain
A retired secret service employee sought to publish his memoirs from Australia. The British government sought to restrain publication there, and the defendants sought to report those proceedings, which would involve publication of the allegations . .
Cited – WB v H Bauer Publishing Ltd 2002
. .
Cited – Smithkline Beecham Plc/BASF AG v Generics (UK) Limited / Smithkline Beecham Plc CA 25-Jul-2003
The claimant had been involved in patent infringement proceedings. Papers had been disclosed to them under confidentiality conditions imposed by the judge. In these subsequent proceedings, they sought leave to use the material.
Held: An order . .
Cited – W v Westminster City Council and Others QBD 9-Dec-2004
The claimant sought to bring an action for defamation based upon communications made in a child protection conference. The reference was in a Report for Conference to be held pursuant to the duties imposed on local authorities by the Children Act . .
Cited – Re Angela Roddy (a child) (identification: restriction on publication), Torbay Borough Council v News Group Newspapers FD 2-Dec-2003
A twelve year old girl had become pregnant. The Catholic Church was said to have paid her not to have an abortion. After the birth she and her baby were taken into care. The authority proposed the adoption of the baby. There was more publicity. . .
Cited – Regina v Broadcasting Complaints Commission Ex Parte Granada Television Ltd CA 16-Dec-1994
The Broadasting Complaints Commission had been established to determine questions of privacy, and the courts should be slow to intervene. The right of privacy of an individual had not been lost by past publicity. That privacy had been infringed by . .
Cited – Fraser v Evans CA 1969
The law of confidence is based on the moral principles of loyalty and fair dealing. An injunction was sought to restrain an intended publication: ‘The court will not restrain the publication of an article, even though it is defamatory, when the . .
Cited – Beloff v Pressdram Ltd QBD 1973
A journalist on The Observer sued the publishers of Private Eye for having published a memorandum of the plaintiff about a politician, Mr Maudling, which had been circulated amongst the employees of The Observer.
Held: The defences to a claim . .
Cited – Woodward v Hutchins CA 1977
An injunction was sought to restrain publication of confidential information about a well-known pop group, starring Tom Jones and Engelbert Humperdinck. As the group’s press agent, the defendant’s role had been to see that the group received . .
Cited – Attorney-General v Parry 2004
. .
Cited – Frisbee v Campbell CA 14-Oct-2002
The claimant sought an account against her former employee for the disclosures made by her of their activities. The respondent had signed a confidentiality agreement. The respondent counterclaimed for assault. She now appealed from dismissal of her . .
Cited – Regina v Broadcasting Complaints Commission, ex Parte Granada Television Ltd QBD 31-May-1993
The Commission had not been unreasonable in taking the view that a broadcast had infringed the privacy of the subject of the complaint. Judicial Review was not available against BBC for infringement of privacy. . .
Cited – Lion Laboratories Ltd v Evans CA 1985
Lion Laboratories manufactured and marketed the Lion Intoximeter which was used by the police for measuring blood alcohol levels of motorists. Two ex-employees approached the Press with four documents taken from Lion. The documents indicated that . .
Cited – SK and F v Department of Community Services 1990
‘ . . An examination of the recent English decisions shows that the so-called ‘public interest’ defence is not so much a rule of law as an invitation to judicial idiosyncrasy by deciding each case on an ad hoc basis as to whether, on the facts . .
Appeal from – Mckennitt and others v Ash and Another CA 25-May-2006
Application for permission to appeal. Granted. . .
Appeal from – Ash and Another v McKennitt and others CA 14-Dec-2006
The claimant was a celebrated Canadian folk musician. The defendant, a former friend, published a story of their close friendship. The claimant said the relationship had been private, and publication infringed her privacy rights, and she obtained an . .
Cited – Associated Newspapers Ltd v Prince of Wales CA 21-Dec-2006
The defendant newspaper appealed summary judgment against it for breach of confidence and copyright infringement having published the claimant’s journals which he said were private.
Held: Upheld, although the judge had given insufficient . .
Cited – Murray v Express Newspapers Plc and Another ChD 7-Aug-2007
The claimant, now aged four and the son of a famous author, was photographed by use of a long lens, but in a public street. He now sought removal of the photograph from the defendant’s catalogue, and damages for breach of confidence.
Held: The . .
Cited – In re A (A Minor) FD 8-Jul-2011
An application was made in care proceedings for an order restricting publication of information about the family after the deaths of two siblings of the child subject to the application. The Sun and a local newspaper had already published stories . .
Cited – Ingenious Media Holdings Plc and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Revenue and Customs SC 19-Oct-2016
The tax payer complained that the Permanent Secretary for Tax had, in an off the record briefing disclosed tax details regarding a film investment scheme. Despite the off the record basis, details were published in a newspaper. His claims had been . .
Cited – HRH The Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Ltd ChD 11-Feb-2021
Defence had no prospect of success – Struck Out
The claimant complained that the defendant newspaper had published contents from a letter she had sent to her father. The court now considered her claims in breach of privacy and copyright, and her request for summary judgment.
Held: Warby J . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.238324
Relief for copyright infringement was refused where the nature of the work tended to gross immorality. Younger J said that it was: ‘clear law that copyright cannot exist in a work of a tendency so grossly immoral as this, a work which apart from its other objectionable features, advocates free love and justifies adultery where the marriage tie has become merely irksome’ and
‘if, in considering whether such a literary work as a novel has been infringed by such a thing as a cinematograph film, the true enquiry is . . whether, keeping in view the idea and general effect created by a perusal of the novel, such a degree of similarity is attained as would lead one to say that the film is a reproduction of incidents described in the novel or of a substantial part thereof, then in my opinion the answer in the present case must be in the negative.’
. . ‘no infringement of the plaintiff’s rights takes place where a defendant has bestowed such mental labour upon what he has taken and has subjected it to such revision and alteration as to produce an original result’
Younger J
[1916] 1 Ch 261
Cited – Attorney-General v Guardian Newspapers Ltd (No 2) (‘Spycatcher’) HL 13-Oct-1988
Loss of Confidentiality Protection – public domain
A retired secret service employee sought to publish his memoirs from Australia. The British government sought to restrain publication there, and the defendants sought to report those proceedings, which would involve publication of the allegations . .
Cited – Hyde Park Residence Ltd v Yelland, News Group Newspapers Ltd, News International Ltd, Murrell CA 10-Feb-2000
The court considered a dispute about ownership and confidence in and copyright of of video tapes taken by Princess Diana before her death.
Held: The courts have an inherent discretion to refuse to enforce of copyright. When assessing whether . .
Cited – Stephens v Avery ChD 1988
The parties had been friends and had discussed their sex lives. The defendant took the information to a newspaper and its editor, the second and subsequent defendants who published it. The plaintiff sought damages saying the conversations and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.223827
The claimant magazine publisher alleged breach of copyright by the defendant in their magazine, as to the cover page designs used. It was not clear just which cover was said to have been copied.
Held: The first step in a copyright action is for the claimant to identify what work or works he relies on. The claims were consistently indistinct in the allegations of just what had been copied. Claims for artisitic infringement were interspersed with claims of literary infringement. The two should not be mixed: ‘It is impossible to define the boundary between the mere taking of general concepts and ideas on the one hand and copying in the copyright sense on the other’. The claimant pointed only to the similarities, and ignored significant differences, and ‘some parts of this allegation of copying verge on the absurd . . .’ A credible case had not been made out.
Laddie J explained: ‘ . . If an author puts sufficient relevant artistic effort into producing a drawing or other artistic work from known ingredients, it will be protected by copyright. Monet was, no doubt, not the first artist to paint water lilies, but his paintings of them were protected by copyright. They would also not have been deprived of copyright because they were very similar to earlier paintings by him dealing with the same subject matter.’
Laddies J
[2004] EWHC 2985 (Ch), [2005] FSR 20
Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 1(1)
England and Wales
Cited – King Features Syndicate Inc v O&M Kleeman Ltd CA 2-Jan-1940
. .
Cited – Cala Homes (South) Ltd and Others v Alfred Mcalpine Homes East Ltd (No 2) ChD 30-Oct-1995
A plaintiff may claim damages under section 97(2) in addition to claiming an account of profits, as his primary remedy. A person claiming joint rights in the copyright as author must contribute to the ‘production’ of the work and create something . .
Cited – King Features Syndicate Inc v O and M Kleeman Ltd ChD 1940
The plaintiff alleging copyright infringement, had relied on fifty five drawings of the Popeye character out of the many thousands of such drawings in the cartoon series. The defendant might have copied from any one of those thousands.
Held: . .
Cited – Green v Broadcasting Corporation of New Zealand PC 18-Jul-1989
Format of TV show not copyrightable
Court of Appeal of New Zealand – The plaintiff had developed the program ‘Opportunity Knocks’ on British television. He claimed copyright in the general structure or format of a similar television programme in New Zealand, and also in passing off. . .
Cited – Designers Guild Ltd v Russell Williams (Textiles) Ltd CA 26-Mar-1999
The claimant alleged copying of designs. The defendant appealed a finding that copying had taken place.
Held: The rejection of the dissection test in Ladbroke was as to the subsistence of copyright and not as to infringement. Evidence of those . .
Cited – Nichols v Universal Pictures Co 1930
(US Second Circuit) The judge discussed the difficulty in copyright cases in drawing the line between the taking of general concepts and copying in an infringing manner: ‘Upon any work, and especially upon a play, a great number of patterns of . .
Cited – Ladbroke (Football) Ltd v William Hill (Football) Ltd HL 1964
What is substantial copying
The plaintiff alleged copying of their football pools coupons and copyright infringement. The issues were as to the extent of copying required to establish infringement, and whether it was proper to look at the several parts of the work separately. . .
Cited – Designers Guild Ltd v Russell Williams (Textiles) Ltd (Trading As Washington DC) HL 28-Nov-2000
Copyright Claim: Was it Copied, and How Much?
The claimant sought to enforce its copyright in artwork for a fabric design Ixia, saying the defendant’s design Marguerite infringed that copyright. Two issues faced the House. Just what had been copied and if any, then did this amount amount to the . .
Cited – Baigent and Another v The Random House Group Ltd (The Da Vinci Code) ChD 7-Apr-2006
The claimants alleged infringement of copyright by the defendant publishers and author in the plot and otherwise in the book ‘The Da Vinci Code’. They said that their own work had been copied substantially, using themes and copying language. The . .
Cited – Coffey v Warner Chappell Music Ltd, Warner Music UK Ltd and EMI Music Publishing Ltd ChD 16-May-2005
The singer had recorded a song, ‘Forever After’. She sought damages in copyright saying that a later recording by the defendants titled ‘Nothing Really Matters’ was infringing, having copied elements of the voice expression of her own performance, . .
Cited – HRH The Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Ltd ChD 11-Feb-2021
Defence had no prospect of success – Struck Out
The claimant complained that the defendant newspaper had published contents from a letter she had sent to her father. The court now considered her claims in breach of privacy and copyright, and her request for summary judgment.
Held: Warby J . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.226183
The court considered a dispute about ownership and confidence in and copyright of of video tapes taken by Princess Diana before her death.
Held: The courts have an inherent discretion to refuse to enforce of copyright. When assessing whether the copyright should be enforced the relevant issues would be ones arising from the work itself, and not from the ownership. Copyright rights are assignable in law, and therefore the court must apply different tests to those which applied to the breach of confidence. Here photographs had been copied, sold and republished. Even if some degree of use would be fair dealing, excessive use can render the use unfair: ‘ the basis of the defence of public interest in a breach of confidence action cannot be the same as the basis of such defence to an action for infringement of copyright. In an action for breach of confidence the foundation of the action can fall away if that is required in the public interest, but that can never happen in a copyright action. The jurisdiction to refuse to enforce copyright, which I believe has been recognised comes from the court’s inherent jurisdiction. It is limited to cases where enforcement of the copyright would offend against the policy of the law. ‘ . . . a court would be entitled to refuse to enforce copyright if the work is: (i) immoral, scandalous or contrary to family life; (ii) injurious to public life, public health and safety or the administration of justice; (iii) incites or encourages others to act in a way referred to in (ii).’ The attempt to establish a public interest defence failed.
Lord Justice Stuart-Smith, Lord Justice Aldous, And Lord Justice Mance
Times 16-Feb-2000, Gazette 24-Feb-2000, [2000] EWCA Civ 37, [2001] Ch 143, [2000] RPC 604, [2000] ECDR 275, [2000] EMLR 363, [2000] 3 WLR 215
England and Wales
See Also – Hyde Park Residence Ltd v Murrell EAT 9-Jul-1999
. .
Appeal from – Hyde Park Residence Limited v Yelland, News Group Newspapers Limited, News International Limited, Murrell PatC 16-Mar-1999
There is a public interest defence to an allegation of copyright infringement. A newspaper republished video camera stills to demonstrate the untruth of assertions made publicly about the relationship if Princess Diana and Dodi Fayed.
Held: It . .
Cited – Pro Sieben Media AG v Carlton Television Ltd and Another CA 7-Jan-1999
The defendant was accused of infringing copyright in a TV programme relating to the pregnancy of a woman with eight foetuses. The defendant claimed fair dealing, but that defence was rejected by the trial judge.
Held: The decision was . .
Cited – Weld-Blundell v Stephens CA 1919
The exception to the obligation not to disclose confidential information is limited to the proposed or contemplated commission of a crime or a civil wrong. . .
Cited – The Newspaper Licensing Agency Limited v Marks and Spencer Plc PatC 19-Jan-1999
The daily circulation within a large company of press cuttings was outside the scope of the reporting of current events defences to copyright infringement. Ownership of the typographical arrangement of a newspaper article sufficed to found a claim. . .
Cited – Annesley v Earl of Anglesea 1743
‘no private obligations can dispense with that universal one which lies on every member of the society to discover every design which may be formed, contrary to the laws of the society, to destroy the public welfare.’ . .
Cited – Time Warner Entertainments LP v Channel Four Television Corporation plc CA 1994
In testing whether a defence to copyright infringement of fair dealing succeeds, the court can take note of the actual purpose of the work, and will look carefully to verify the claimed purpose: ‘it is necessary to have regard to the true purpose of . .
Cited – Associated Newspapers Group plc v News Group Newspapers 1986
The Sun printed copyright letters which had passed between the late Duke and Duchess of Windsor, but the exclusive rights to which had been obtained by another newspaper. As to dicta that use by a competitor is not fair: ‘That seems to be exactly . .
Cited – British Oxygen Company Limited v Liquid Air Limited 1925
The plaintiff alleged a breach of copyright by the publication of a letter.
Held: The defence of fair dealing was rejected.
Romer J said: ‘But I need not consider this further, and for this reason; the Act no doubt extends to unpublished . .
Mentioned – Hindley v Higgins and News Group Newspapers Ltd CA 24-Aug-1983
The court considered what would amount to fair dealing in copyright . .
Cited – Beloff v Pressdram Ltd QBD 1973
A journalist on The Observer sued the publishers of Private Eye for having published a memorandum of the plaintiff about a politician, Mr Maudling, which had been circulated amongst the employees of The Observer.
Held: The defences to a claim . .
Cited – Initial Services Ltd v Putterill CA 1967
The plaintiff’s sales manager resigned, but took with him confidential documents which he gave to a newspaper. The defendant sought to justify this, saying that the company had failed to register agreements it should have done under the Act.
Cited – Lion Laboratories Ltd v Evans CA 1985
Lion Laboratories manufactured and marketed the Lion Intoximeter which was used by the police for measuring blood alcohol levels of motorists. Two ex-employees approached the Press with four documents taken from Lion. The documents indicated that . .
Cited – Fraser v Evans CA 1969
The law of confidence is based on the moral principles of loyalty and fair dealing. An injunction was sought to restrain an intended publication: ‘The court will not restrain the publication of an article, even though it is defamatory, when the . .
Cited – Coco v A N Clark (Engineers) Ltd ChD 1968
Requirememts to prove breach of confidence
A claim was made for breach of confidence in respect of technical information whose value was commercial.
Held: Megarry J set out three elements which will normally be required if, apart from contract, a case of breach of confidence is to . .
Cited – Woodward v Hutchins CA 1977
An injunction was sought to restrain publication of confidential information about a well-known pop group, starring Tom Jones and Engelbert Humperdinck. As the group’s press agent, the defendant’s role had been to see that the group received . .
Cited – Hubbard v Vosper CA 1971
Claims of infringement were made as to copyright works being various works about Scientology. Extracts had appeared in the defendant’s book which was critical of the cult. It was submitted by the plaintiff that the fair dealing section applied only . .
Cited – British Steel Corporation v Granada Television Ltd HL 7-May-1980
The defendant had broadcast a TV programme using material confidential to the plaintiff, who now sought disclosure of the identity of the presumed thief.
Held: (Lord Salmon dissenting) The courts have never recognised a public interest right . .
Cited – Express Newspapers v News (UK) plc 1990
If summary judgment is given to one party on his claim, it must also be given on a counterclaim made on the same basis by the defendant. The principle that a party to litigation cannot ‘approbate and reprobate’ (or ‘blow hot and cold’) can curtail a . .
Cited – Attorney-General v Guardian Newspapers Ltd (No 2) (‘Spycatcher’) HL 13-Oct-1988
Loss of Confidentiality Protection – public domain
A retired secret service employee sought to publish his memoirs from Australia. The British government sought to restrain publication there, and the defendants sought to report those proceedings, which would involve publication of the allegations . .
Cited – Glyn v Weston Feature Film Co 1916
Relief for copyright infringement was refused where the nature of the work tended to gross immorality. Younger J said that it was: ‘clear law that copyright cannot exist in a work of a tendency so grossly immoral as this, a work which apart from its . .
Cited – Holman v Johnson 5-Jul-1775
ex turpi causa non oritur actio
A claim was made for the price of goods which the plaintiff sold to the defendant in Dunkirk, knowing that the defendant’s purpose was to smuggle the goods into England. The plaintiff was met with a defence of illegality.
Held: The defence . .
Cited – Francome v Mirror Group Newspapers Ltd CA 1984
The defendant had acquired illegal tapes of telephone conversations which it said implicated the plaintiff. He sought to restrain publication of the material pending forthcoming discliplinary charges at the Jockey Club.
Held: The court had to . .
See Also – Hyde Park Residence Ltd v Murrell EAT 9-Jul-1999
. .
Appealed to – Hyde Park Residence Limited v Yelland, News Group Newspapers Limited, News International Limited, Murrell PatC 16-Mar-1999
There is a public interest defence to an allegation of copyright infringement. A newspaper republished video camera stills to demonstrate the untruth of assertions made publicly about the relationship if Princess Diana and Dodi Fayed.
Held: It . .
Cited – Fraser-Woodward Ltd v British Broadcasting Corporation Brighter Pictures Ltd ChD 23-Mar-2005
The claimant asserted infringement of copyright by the defendants in photographs of the family of David Beckham. The defendant admitted using the photographs but asserted that no permission was required since the use was a fair dealing.
Held: . .
Cited – HRH The Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Ltd ChD 11-Feb-2021
Defence had no prospect of success – Struck Out
The claimant complained that the defendant newspaper had published contents from a letter she had sent to her father. The court now considered her claims in breach of privacy and copyright, and her request for summary judgment.
Held: Warby J . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.147070
The claimants were to be married. They sold the rights to publish photographs of their wedding, but various of the defendants took and published unauthorised pictures.
Held: The claimants had gone to lengths to ensure the commercial value of their celebration, and it could attract the protection given in law to confidential matters. What matters is whether the information has ‘the basic attribute of inaccessibility’. That right was to be balanced against the right of freedom of expression.
In this case the defendants had also acted in breach of the Press Complaints Commission code, and the balance fell in favour of the claimants. The developing law of private confidence is a fusion of commercial confidence and human rights. As to Data Protection, three Defendants were data controllers, the unauthorised pictures were personal data and publication is covered by the Act. When a data controller is responsible for the publication of hard copies that reproduce data that has previously been processed by means of equipment operated automatically, the publication forms part of the process and falls within the scope of the Act. The claimants were entitled to an award under the Act.
Lindsay J
[2003] EWHC 786 (Ch), Times 21-Apr-2003, [2003] 3 All ER 996, [2003] EMLR 31
England and Wales
Cited – Prince Albert v Strange ChD 8-Feb-1849
The Prince sought to restrain publication of otherwise unpublished private etchings and lists of works by Queen Victoria. The etchings appeared to have been removed surreptitiously from or by one Brown. A personal confidence was claimed.
Held: . .
Cited – Fraser v Evans CA 1969
The law of confidence is based on the moral principles of loyalty and fair dealing. An injunction was sought to restrain an intended publication: ‘The court will not restrain the publication of an article, even though it is defamatory, when the . .
Cited – Coco v A N Clark (Engineers) Ltd ChD 1968
Requirememts to prove breach of confidence
A claim was made for breach of confidence in respect of technical information whose value was commercial.
Held: Megarry J set out three elements which will normally be required if, apart from contract, a case of breach of confidence is to . .
Cited – Shelley Films Ltd v Rex Features Ltd ChD 1994
Still photographs had been taken of a forthcoming film, which the producers had taken steps to keep confidential.
Held: A chancery judge may grant an injunction to restrain the publication of photographs taken surreptitiously in circumstances . .
Cited – Creation Records Ltd and Another v News Group Newspapers Ltd ChD 29-Apr-1997
A pop group had posed at a specially devised scene, consisting of a white Rolls Royce in the swimming pool of a hotel and incorporating various other props. The object of the exercise was to take a photograph to be used as a record cover. The . .
Cited – Gilbert v The Star Newspaper Co Ltd ChD 1894
W.S. Gilbert had found that, in breach of the implied obligation upon cast members and theatre employees not to disclose the plot of the play in respect of which they were engaged, the plot of his comic opera ‘His Excellency’ had been disclosed to . .
Cited – O Mustad and Son v Dosen and Another; O Mustad and Son vAllcock HL 1924
(Heard in 1924, but noted only in 1963) Dosen worked for a company T under a contract of employment that included an undertaking to keep confidential information acquired at work. His employer went into liquidation. The benefit of that company’s . .
Cited – Stephens v Avery ChD 1988
The parties had been friends and had discussed their sex lives. The defendant took the information to a newspaper and its editor, the second and subsequent defendants who published it. The plaintiff sought damages saying the conversations and . .
Cited – Pollard v Photographic Co 1888
Mrs Pollard had contracted with the defendant for photographs to be taken of herself for her own purposes. She found that the defendant was using the photograph for quite different purposes. She argued that, she having contracted for the photograph . .
Cited – Sports and General Press Agency v ‘Our Dogs’ Publishing Co CA 1917
The plaintiff had sold to the Press photographic rights to a dog show. An independent photographer took pictures and sold them to the defendant, who published them. The plaintiff sought to restrain further publication.
Held: An injunction was . .
See Also – Douglas, Zeta-Jones, Northern and Shell Plc v Hello! Limited, Hola SA, Junco, The Marquesa De Varela, Neneta Overseas Limited, Ramey CA 12-Feb-2003
The claimants claimed infringement of the privacy of their wedding celebrations. They requested permission for service out of the jurisdiction to join Mr Ramey as defendant, saying he had been the one who had taken some of the photographs in New . .
See Also – Douglas and others v Hello! Ltd etc ChD 7-Nov-2003
The claimants had succeeded in a claim of distress occasioned by breach of confidence and breach of the Data Protection Act by the taking and selling of photographs from their wedding.
Held: As to losses, for the magazine who had bought the . .
Appeal from – Douglas and others v Hello! Ltd and others (No 3) CA 18-May-2005
The principal claimants sold the rights to take photographs of their wedding to a co-claimant magazine (OK). Persons acting on behalf of the defendants took unauthorised photographs which the defendants published. The claimants had retained joint . .
Cited – Bunt v Tilley and others QBD 10-Mar-2006
The claimant sought damages in defamation in respect of statements made on internet bulletin boards. He pursued the operators of the bulletin boards, and the court now considered the liability of the Internet Service Providers whose systems had . .
Cited – Bunt v Tilley and others QBD 10-Mar-2006
The claimant sought damages in defamation in respect of statements made on internet bulletin boards. He pursued the operators of the bulletin boards, and the court now considered the liability of the Internet Service Providers whose systems had . .
Cited – HRH The Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Ltd ChD 11-Feb-2021
Defence had no prospect of success – Struck Out
The claimant complained that the defendant newspaper had published contents from a letter she had sent to her father. The court now considered her claims in breach of privacy and copyright, and her request for summary judgment.
Held: Warby J . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.180704
The appellant complained that a part of his confidential diaries had been republished without his consent by the defendant newspaper group. The defendant appealed, saying that the publication was fair dealing.
Held: The exceptions within the Copyright Act were not sufficient to obviate entirely potential conflicts with the rights of freedom of expression under the Convention Art 10. The right to freedom of expression could be balanced, in a democratic society, with the private rights under the Act. The Convention right protected the freedom of expression of ideas, the Act protected particular forms of expression of those ideas. The circumstances in which the public interest might override copyright were not capable of exact categorisation or definition. The fair dealing provision was an instance of the right of freedom of expression displacing copyright protection.
The most important factors when deciding whether there had been fair use were: ‘(1) The degree to which the alleged infringing use competes with exploitation of the copyright work by the owner . . (2) Whether the work has been published or not . . (3) The extent of the use and the importance of what has been taken. In many cases this will be a highly important factor . .’
‘ . . . by far the most important factor is whether the alleged fair dealing is in fact commercially competing with the proprietor’s exploitation of the copyright work, a substitute for the probable purchase of authorised copies, and the like. If it is, the fair dealing defence will almost certainly fail. If it is not and there is a moderate taking and there are no special adverse factors, the defence is likely to succeed, especially if the defendant’s additional purpose is to right a wrong, to ventilate an honest grievance, to engage in political controversy, and so on. The second most important factor is whether the work has already been published or otherwise exposed to the public. If it has not, and especially if the material has been obtained by a breach of confidence or other mean or underhand dealing, the courts will be reluctant to say this is fair. However this is by no means conclusive, for sometimes it is necessary for the purposes of legitimate public controversy to make use of ‘leaked’ information. The third most important factor is the amount and importance of the work that has been taken. For, although it is permissible to take a substantial part of the work (if not, there could be no question of infringement in the first place), in some circumstances the taking of an excessive amount, or the taking of even a small amount if on a regular basis, would negative fair dealing.’
Lord Phillips MR, Lord Justice Robert Walker, Lord Justice Keene
Times 01-Aug-2001, (2001) 24(9) IPD 24058,, [2001] HRLR 57, [2001] EMLR 44, [2001] 4 All ER 666, [2001] UKHRR 1242, [2002] ECC 19, [2002] RPC 5, [2001] 3 WLR 1368, [2002] ECDR 32, Gazette 31-Aug-2001, [2001] EWCA Civ 1142, [2002] Ch 149, [2002] RPC 235
Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 30, 171(3), European Convention on Human Rights
England and Wales
Appeal from – Ashdown v Telegraph Group Ltd ChD 11-Jan-2001
The claimant, during his career had written private diaries, including minutes of secret political meetings. As he stepped down from leadership, he began to arrange publication. Before this was complete, the defendant published extracts. He . .
Cited – Fraser-Woodward Ltd v British Broadcasting Corporation Brighter Pictures Ltd ChD 23-Mar-2005
The claimant asserted infringement of copyright by the defendants in photographs of the family of David Beckham. The defendant admitted using the photographs but asserted that no permission was required since the use was a fair dealing.
Held: . .
Cited – IPC Media Ltd v News Group Newspapers Ltd ChD 24-Feb-2005
The defendant sought to advertise its new TV listings magazine, and to do so reproduced in its advert a copy of the front page of the equivalent magazine published by the claimant. The claimant sought damages for copyright infringement. The . .
Cited – Grisbrook v MGN Ltd and Others ChD 16-Oct-2009
The claimant sought an order committing officers of the defendant company for having failed to obey a court order requiring the defendant to cease infrigement of his copyright in photographs. He operated as a photographer of celebrities selling . .
Cited – Forensic Telecommunications Services Ltd v West Yorkshire Police and Another ChD 9-Nov-2011
The claimant alleged infringement by the defendant of assorted intellectual property rights in its database. It provided systems for recovering materials deleted from Nokia mobile phones.
Held: ‘the present case is concerned with a collection . .
Cited – The Newspaper Licensing Agency Ltd and Others v Meltwater Holding Bv and Others ChD 26-Nov-2010
The claimant newspapers complained of the spidering of the web-sites and redistribution of the materials collected by the defendants to its subscribers. The defendants including the Public Relations Consultants Association (PRCA) denied that they . .
Cited – Heythrop Zoological Gardens Ltd (T/A Amazing Animals) and Another v Captive Animals Protection Society ChD 20-May-2016
The claimant said that the defendant had, through its members visiting their premises, breached the licence under which they entered, by taking photographs and distributing them on the internet, and in so doing also infringing the performance rights . .
Cited – HRH The Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Ltd ChD 11-Feb-2021
Defence had no prospect of success – Struck Out
The claimant complained that the defendant newspaper had published contents from a letter she had sent to her father. The court now considered her claims in breach of privacy and copyright, and her request for summary judgment.
Held: Warby J . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.159941
The parties had been friends and had discussed their sex lives. The defendant took the information to a newspaper and its editor, the second and subsequent defendants who published it. The plaintiff sought damages saying the conversations and disclosures had been confidential. The defendants appealed against a refusal to strike out the claim.
Held: The defendants had published knowing that the material was disclosed in confidence. Though gross sexual immorality might not be protected from disclosure, information about sexual activites could be protected under a legally enforceable duty of confidence, where it would be unconscionable for someone who had received information on an expressly confidential basis to disclose it. It was up to the defendants to show that there had been no basis in law for the claim. They had failed to do so. However, the fact that all the conditions for relief have been established does not mean, in the case of a remedy in equity, that relief will automatically follow. The court has an equitable jurisdiction to restrain a breach of confidence independently of any right at law, and this is capable of protecting relationships outside that of husband of wife, though possibly only where the confidence was express.
The fact that information may be known to a limited number of members of the public does not of itself prevent it having and retaining the character of confidentiality: ‘Information only ceases to be capable of protection as confidential when it is in fact known to a substantial number of people.’
Browne-Wilkinson V-C J said as to the case of Glyn v Weston Feature Film Co: ‘I entirely accept the principle stated in that case, the principle being that a court of equity will not enforce copyright, and presumably also will not enforce a duty of confidence, relating to matters which have a grossly immoral tendency. But at the present day the difficulty is to identify what sexual conduct is to be treated as grossly immoral. In 1915 there was a code of sexual morals accepted by the overwhelming majority of society. A judge could therefore stigmatize certain sexual conduct as offending that moral code. But at the present day no such general code exists. There is no common view that sexual conduct of any kind between consenting adults is grossly immoral . . If it is right that there is now no generally accepted code of sexual morality applying to this case, it would be quite wrong in my judgment for any judge to apply his own personal moral views, however strongly held, in deciding the legal rights of the parties. The court’s function is to apply the law, not personal prejudice. Only in a case where there is still a generally accepted moral code can the court refuse to enforce rights in such a way as to offend that generally accepted code.’
Sir Nicholas Browne-Wilkinson V-C
[1988] 2 WLR 1280, [1988] I Ch 449, [1988] 2 All ER 477, [1988] Ch 449, [1988] FSR 510, (1988) 11 IPR 439
England and Wales
Cited – Glyn v Weston Feature Film Co 1916
Relief for copyright infringement was refused where the nature of the work tended to gross immorality. Younger J said that it was: ‘clear law that copyright cannot exist in a work of a tendency so grossly immoral as this, a work which apart from its . .
Cited – Attorney-General v Greater Manchester Newspapers Ltd QBD 4-Dec-2001
The defendant newspaper had published facts relating to the whereabouts of two youths protected by injunction against the publication of any information likely to lead to their location. The injunction was not ambiguous or unclear. ‘Likely’ did not . .
Cited – Douglas etc v Hello! Ltd etc ChD 11-Apr-2003
The claimants were to be married. They sold the rights to publish photographs of their wedding, but various of the defendants took and published unauthorised pictures.
Held: The claimants had gone to lengths to ensure the commercial value of . .
Cited – Okta Crude Oil Refinery A D v Mamidoil-Jetoil Greek Petroleum Company S A and Another CA 17-Jul-2003
The parties had contracted to allow an exclusive right to deliver oil by tanker and to sell into Macedonia. The defendants claimed they were overborn, and claimed exemption under a force majeure clause.
Held: The acts which had made the . .
Cited – Okta Crude Oil Refinery A D v Mamidoil-Jetoil Greek Petroleum Company S A and Another CA 17-Jul-2003
The parties had contracted to allow an exclusive right to deliver oil by tanker and to sell into Macedonia. The defendants claimed they were overborn, and claimed exemption under a force majeure clause.
Held: The acts which had made the . .
Cited – Lord Browne of Madingley v Associated Newspapers Ltd CA 3-Apr-2007
The appellant sought to restrict publication by the defendants in the Mail on Sunday of matters which he said were a breach of confidence. He had lied to a court in giving evidence, whilst at the same time being ready to trash the reputation of his . .
Cited – AMM v HXW QBD 7-Oct-2010
The claimant had sought and been granted an injunction to prevent the defendant publicising matters which had passed between them and which were he said private.
Held: The jurisdiction to grant such injunctions was now established. Publication . .
Cited – Barrymore v News Group Newspapers Limited ChD 1997
The newspaper defendant sought to publish information about features of an intimate homosexual relationship. The plaintiff sought to prevent it.
Held: The injunction was granted.
Jacob J said: ‘The fact is that when people kiss and later . .
Cited – HRH The Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Ltd ChD 11-Feb-2021
Defence had no prospect of success – Struck Out
The claimant complained that the defendant newspaper had published contents from a letter she had sent to her father. The court now considered her claims in breach of privacy and copyright, and her request for summary judgment.
Held: Warby J . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.181410
The claimant, during his career had written private diaries, including minutes of secret political meetings. As he stepped down from leadership, he began to arrange publication. Before this was complete, the defendant published extracts. He complained of breach of copyright.
Held: The claim succeeded. The VC granted a final injunction against any further infringement and directed disclosure of information to enable Mr Ashdown to exercise his right of election between damages and an account of profits. The Human Rights Act did not operate to extend the defences available to a claim for copyright infringement, on the basis that it was needed to provide for freedom of the press. The needs of the right to freedom of expression were satisfied by the defences available under the Act, including that of fair dealing, and there was no need to consider the individual facts of each situation. The need to have particular regard to an element did not mean that it should be given extra weight.
Sir Andrew Morritt V-C considered the meaning of ‘criticism and review’, saying: ‘I accept, of course, that the expression ‘criticism and review’ is of wide import. Cf Robert Walker LJ in Pro Sieben Media AG v. Carlton UK Television Ltd [1999] 1 WLR 605, 614G. Likewise I accept that it is necessary to have regard to the true purpose of the work. Is it ‘a genuine piece of criticism or review, or is it something else, such as the attempt to dress up the infringement of another’s copyright in the guise of criticism, and so profit unfairly from another’s work’? Cf Henry LJ in Time Warner Entertainments Co LP v. Channel Four Television Corpn plc [1994] EMLR 1, 14. But what is required is that the copying shall take place as part of and for the purpose of criticising and reviewing the work. The work is the minute. But the articles are not criticising or reviewing the minute: they are criticising or reviewing the actions of the Prime Minister and the claimant in October 1997′
Sir Andrew Morritt VC
Times 06-Feb-2001, Gazette 22-Feb-2001, [2001] EWHC Ch 28, [2001] 2 WLR 967
Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988, European Convention on Human Rights 10
England and Wales
Cited – Time Warner Entertainments LP v Channel Four Television Corporation plc CA 1994
In testing whether a defence to copyright infringement of fair dealing succeeds, the court can take note of the actual purpose of the work, and will look carefully to verify the claimed purpose: ‘it is necessary to have regard to the true purpose of . .
Appeal from – Ashdown v Telegraph Group Ltd CA 18-Jul-2001
The appellant complained that a part of his confidential diaries had been republished without his consent by the defendant newspaper group. The defendant appealed, saying that the publication was fair dealing.
Held: The exceptions within the . .
Cited – Fraser-Woodward Ltd v British Broadcasting Corporation Brighter Pictures Ltd ChD 23-Mar-2005
The claimant asserted infringement of copyright by the defendants in photographs of the family of David Beckham. The defendant admitted using the photographs but asserted that no permission was required since the use was a fair dealing.
Held: . .
Cited – Forensic Telecommunications Services Ltd v West Yorkshire Police and Another ChD 9-Nov-2011
The claimant alleged infringement by the defendant of assorted intellectual property rights in its database. It provided systems for recovering materials deleted from Nokia mobile phones.
Held: ‘the present case is concerned with a collection . .
Cited – The Newspaper Licensing Agency Ltd and Others v Meltwater Holding Bv and Others ChD 26-Nov-2010
The claimant newspapers complained of the spidering of the web-sites and redistribution of the materials collected by the defendants to its subscribers. The defendants including the Public Relations Consultants Association (PRCA) denied that they . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.77890
There is a public interest defence to an allegation of copyright infringement. A newspaper republished video camera stills to demonstrate the untruth of assertions made publicly about the relationship if Princess Diana and Dodi Fayed. It was a current event.
Gazette 19-May-1999
Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 30(2) 97
England and Wales
Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.81571
Mr Candy claimed remedies for what he alleged were completed or threatened wrongs in the form of breach of confidence, misuse of private information, and breach of the Data Protection Act 1998 (‘DPA’) against five defendants, one of whom had filmed the claimant misbehaving whilst intoxicated, and threatened to publish it.
Warby J
[2017] EWHC 373 (QB)
England and Wales
See Also – Holyoake and Another v Candy and Others ChD 27-Jul-2016
The claimants alleged several torts had been involved in a substantial fraud on them by means of a funding loan. . .
See Also – Holyoake and Another v Candy and Others ChD 29-Nov-2016
Application by the Defendants for security for costs. . .
See Also – Holyoake v Candy and Another QBD 24-Jan-2017
The claimant sought to have access to his personal information held by the defendant. The defendant relied upon the legal professional privilege exemption. . .
See Also – Holyoake and Another v Candy and Others ChD 27-Feb-2017
Applications for further disclosure on the grounds of collateral waiver. . .
See Also – Candy and Others v Holyoake and Another CA 28-Feb-2017
Appeal against grant of ‘notification injunction’ . .
Cited – Hutcheson (Formerly Known As ‘KGM’) v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Others CA 19-Jul-2011
The claimant appealed against the refusal of a privacy order, protecting his identity in his claim.
Held: The appeal was refused. That Article 8 was ‘engaged’ was not conclusive of the question whether the claimant enjoyed a reasonable . .
Cited – Candy v Holyoake and Others (No 2) QBD 22-Nov-2017
. .
See Also – Holyoake and Another v Candy and Others ChD 21-Dec-2017
. .
Cited – HRH The Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Ltd ChD 11-Feb-2021
Defence had no prospect of success – Struck Out
The claimant complained that the defendant newspaper had published contents from a letter she had sent to her father. The court now considered her claims in breach of privacy and copyright, and her request for summary judgment.
Held: Warby J . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.578047
[2012] UKIntelP o17712
England and Wales
Updated: 22 July 2022; Ref: scu.460074
[2012] UKIntelP o14712
England and Wales
Updated: 22 July 2022; Ref: scu.460075
[2012] UKIntelP o15012
England and Wales
Updated: 22 July 2022; Ref: scu.460085
The applicant refused to provide an address for service in the United Kingdom, as required under rule 30(1)(a), on the grounds that the rule contravened the Treaty Establishing the European Community. The Hearing Officer observed that the rule was approved by Parliament and could only be amended by the Secretary of State through the normal statutory process. He also stated that it was not for him to determine whether or not the rule contravened any treaty and that this was consistent with the view taken by Lord Diplock in E’s Application [1983] RPC 231. As the Comptroller has no discretion to waive the requirement, the Hearing Officer concluded that the Office was correct to refuse the application under section 17(3) for failure to meet a formal requirement.
Mr M C Wright
[2003] UKIntelP o13803
England and Wales
Updated: 22 July 2022; Ref: scu.455560
[2003] UKIntelP o13903
England and Wales
Updated: 22 July 2022; Ref: scu.455561
[2011] EWHC 3558 (Ch)
England and Wales
Updated: 22 July 2022; Ref: scu.450253
[2000] UKIntelP o12400
England and Wales
Updated: 22 July 2022; Ref: scu.453811
ECFI Community trade mark – Application for Community word mark ilink – Absolute ground for refusal – Descriptive character – Article 7, paragraph 1, sub c) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 [now Article 7, paragraph 1, c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009].
T-161/09, [2010] EUECJ T-161/09
European
Updated: 22 July 2022; Ref: scu.427702
[1789] EngR 2597, (1789) 3 TR 438, (1789) 100 ER 665
England and Wales
Updated: 22 July 2022; Ref: scu.368228
In earlier proceedings, Zipher had given an undertaking not to pursue their claim over and above a certain level. The defendant now sought to hold them to that undertaking. The claimants replied that the undertaking had lapsed when that action had been lost, and was not resurrected when they won their appeal.
Held: An undertaking should be construed restrictively. It could be effective without being written down, but in this case it had lapsed on the adverse finding.
[2009] EWCA Civ 44
England and Wales
See Also – Markem Corporation and Another v Zipher Ltd CA 22-Mar-2005
A patent which was applied for as a result of a breach of confidence may be capable of giving the victim of the breach the benefit of an interest in the patent. In the UK at least the basis of an entitlement claim must be a breach of the claimant’s . .
See Also – Zipher Ltd v Markem Systems Ltd PatC 16-Jan-2007
. .
Appeal From – Zipher Ltd v Markem Systems Ltd and Another PatC 25-Jun-2008
. .
Appeal From – Zipher Ltd v Markem Systems Ltd and Another PatC 1-Sep-2008
This judgment deals with the issue of the scope of the injunction to which Markem should be entitled in support of the undertaking given to HHJ Fysh QC. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 22 July 2022; Ref: scu.282609
The claimant alleged infringement of its patent for certain airline seats.
Held: The defendant’s aircraft seating system did not infringe its EP (UK) 1,495,908 patent.
Lewison J
[2009] EWHC 26 (Pat), [2009] ECDR 11, (2009) 32(4) IPD 32031
Cited – Halliburton Energy Services, Inc v Smith International (North Sea) Ltd and others PatC 21-Jul-2005
A claim was made for a method of design in which certain calculations were to be carried out recursively, modifying the results each time until a particular criterion was satisfied. Though the method was susceptible of solution by computer, but the . .
Appeal from – Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd v Premium Aircraft Interiors UK Ltd CA 22-Oct-2009
. .
Appeal from – Virgin Atlantic v Premium Aircraft CA 21-Dec-2009
. .
See Also – Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd v Premium Aircraft Interiors UK Ltd and Another CA 23-Feb-2011
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 22 July 2022; Ref: scu.280074
The claimant had carried on business as ‘Mr Spicy’ selling snacks, and had obtained community trade marks for the name. He said that the defendant had allowed the infringement of his rights by allowing sainsbury’s to use the terms in their keywords used by the defendant in their sponsored search entries. The defendant sought to strike out the claim.
Held: The claim as pleaded at the present time does not disclose a cause of action and there should be summary judgment for the defendants against the claimant. There was no evidence that any use of te name made by te defendants indicated any origin of the goods and was a trade mark use..
Morgan J
[2008] EWHC 361 (Ch)
England and Wales
Cited – Arsenal Football Club plc v Reed ECJ 12-Nov-2002
The trade mark owner sought orders against a street vendor who sold articles using their marks. He asserted that the marks were not attached to show any quality, but were used by the fans as badges of allegiance.
Held: The function of a trade . .
Cited – E D and F Man Liquid Products Ltd v Patel and Another CA 4-Apr-2003
The rules contained two occasions on which a court would consider dismissal of a claim as having ‘no real prospect’ of success.
Held: The only significant difference between CPR 24.2 and 13.3(1), is that under the first the overall burden of . .
See Also – Wilson v Yahoo! UK Ltd and others ChD 25-Feb-2008
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.266468
[2008] EWHC 593 (Ch)
England and Wales
Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.266902
[2007] EWHC 2813 (Ch)
England and Wales
See Also – UK Channel Management Ltd v E! Entertainment Television Inc and Another ChD 10-Oct-2007
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.264449
Appeal against registration of mark.
[2008] EWHC 3371 (Ch), [2008] Bus LR 1621
England and Wales
Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.267664
Rimer J
[2007] EWHC 746 (Ch)
England and Wales
Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.261893
The defendant newspaper appealed summary judgment against it for breach of confidence and copyright infringement having published the claimant’s journals which he said were private.
Held: Upheld, although the judge had given insufficient weight to the fact that the information was received under an express obligation of confidence. The court recognised that a duty of confidence expressly adopted under an employment contract carried additional weight in the balance with the freedom of the press, and ‘the significance of the interference with Article 8 rights effected by the Newspaper’s publication of information in the Journal outweighed the significance of the interference with Article 10 rights that would have been involved had the Newspaper been prevented from publishing that information. ‘ and ‘the judge was correct to hold that Prince Charles’ had an unanswerable claim for breach of privacy. When the breach of a confidential relationship is added to the balance, his case is overwhelming. ‘
Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, Chief Justice, May LJ
[2006] EWCA Civ 1776, Times 28-Dec-2006, [2008] EMLR 4, (2007) 104 LSG 30, [2007] Info TLR 267, [2008] Ch 57, [2007] 2 All ER 139, [2007] 3 WLR 222, [2008] EMLR 121
ght, Designs and Patents Act 1988
England and Wales
See Also – HRH the Prince of Wales v Associated Newspapers Ltd ChD 13-Jan-2006
The claimant had for many years kept private journals, whose contents were circulated within a small circle of friends. He now sought to claim confidentiality and copyright in them when the defendant sought to publish them.
Held: There was an . .
Appeal from – HRH the Prince of Wales v Associated Newspapers Ltd. ChD 17-Mar-2006
Application for summary judgment.
Held: Granted . .
Cited – Campbell v Mirror Group Newspapers Ltd (MGN) (No 1) HL 6-May-2004
The claimant appealed against the denial of her claim that the defendant had infringed her right to respect for her private life. She was a model who had proclaimed publicly that she did not take drugs, but the defendant had published a story . .
Cited – Douglas and others v Hello! Ltd and others (No 3) CA 18-May-2005
The principal claimants sold the rights to take photographs of their wedding to a co-claimant magazine (OK). Persons acting on behalf of the defendants took unauthorised photographs which the defendants published. The claimants had retained joint . .
Cited – Von Hannover v Germany ECHR 24-Jun-2004
Princess Caroline of Monaco who had, at some time, received considerable attention in the media throughout Europe, complained at the publication of photographs taken of her withour her permission.
Held: There was no doubt that the publication . .
Cited – Attorney-General v Guardian Newspapers Ltd (No 2) (‘Spycatcher’) HL 13-Oct-1988
Loss of Confidentiality Protection – public domain
A retired secret service employee sought to publish his memoirs from Australia. The British government sought to restrain publication there, and the defendants sought to report those proceedings, which would involve publication of the allegations . .
Cited – Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v M HL 8-Mar-2006
The respondent’s child lived with the estranged father for most of each week. She was obliged to contribute child support. She now lived with a woman, and complained that because her relationship was homosexual, she had been asked to pay more than . .
Cited – Fressoz and Roire v France ECHR 21-Jan-1999
Le Canard Enchaine published the salary of M Calvet, the chairman of Peugeot, (which was publicly available information) and also, by way of confirmation, photographs of the relevant part of his tax assessment, which was confidential and could not . .
Cited – Ash and Another v McKennitt and others CA 14-Dec-2006
The claimant was a celebrated Canadian folk musician. The defendant, a former friend, published a story of their close friendship. The claimant said the relationship had been private, and publication infringed her privacy rights, and she obtained an . .
Cited – McKennitt and others v Ash and Another QBD 21-Dec-2005
The claimant sought to restrain publication by the defendant of a book recounting very personal events in her life. She claimed privacy and a right of confidence. The defendant argued that there was a public interest in the disclosures.
Held: . .
Cited – London Regional Transport, London Underground Limited v Mayor of London Transport for London CA 24-Aug-2001
The claimants sought an interlocutory injunction restraining the defendants from publishing a report in breach of a contractual duty of confidence. This was granted but then discharged on the defendant undertaking only to publish a redacted version. . .
Cited – Frisbee v Campbell CA 14-Oct-2002
The claimant sought an account against her former employee for the disclosures made by her of their activities. The respondent had signed a confidentiality agreement. The respondent counterclaimed for assault. She now appealed from dismissal of her . .
Cited – In re S (a Child) (Identification: Restrictions on Publication) HL 28-Oct-2004
Inherent High Court power may restrain Publicity
The claimant child’s mother was to be tried for the murder of his brother by poisoning with salt. It was feared that the publicity which would normally attend a trial, would be damaging to S, and an application was made for reporting restrictions to . .
Criticised – Hosking and Hosking v Simon Runting and Another 25-Mar-2004
(Court of Appeal of New Zealand) A photographer was commissioned to take photographs of the children of a well known television personality. He took pictures of Mr Hosking’s eighteen month old twins being pushed down a street by their mother. Mr and . .
Cited – Editions Plon (Societe) v France ECHR 18-May-2004
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) No violation of Art. 10 with regard to the interim injunction ; Violation of Art. 10 with regard to the permanent injunction ; Pecuniary damage – claim rejected ; . .
Cited – Lord Browne of Madingley v Associated Newspapers Ltd CA 3-Apr-2007
The appellant sought to restrict publication by the defendants in the Mail on Sunday of matters which he said were a breach of confidence. He had lied to a court in giving evidence, whilst at the same time being ready to trash the reputation of his . .
Cited – RST v UVW QBD 11-Sep-2009
The applicant sought an interim and without notice injunction preventing the defendant from disclosing confidential information covered by an agreement between the parties.
Held: The order was made on a without notice application because there . .
Cited – CTB v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Another (1) QBD 16-May-2011
A leading footballer had obtained an injunction restraining the defendants from publishing his identity and allegations of sexual misconduct. The claimant said that she had demanded money not to go public.
Held: It had not been suggested that . .
Cited – ABC and Others v Telegraph Media Group Ltd CA 23-Oct-2018
Human Rights balance in favour of Interim order
The Claimants, now Appellants sought an injunction to prevent the Defendant, from publishing what they say is confidential information about them which was disclosed in breach of confidence.
Held: The claimant’s appeal succeeded. The court . .
Cited – ZXC v Bloomberg Lp CA 15-May-2020
Privacy Expecation during police investigations
Appeal from a judgment finding that the Defendant had breached the Claimant’s privacy rights. He made an award of damages for the infraction of those rights and granted an injunction restraining Bloomberg from publishing information which further . .
Cited – HRH The Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Ltd ChD 11-Feb-2021
Defence had no prospect of success – Struck Out
The claimant complained that the defendant newspaper had published contents from a letter she had sent to her father. The court now considered her claims in breach of privacy and copyright, and her request for summary judgment.
Held: Warby J . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.247599
Brief order
[2006] EWCA Civ 887
England and Wales
See Also – Hughes v Paxman CA 23-Jun-2006
The parties were co-proprietors of a patent. Mr Hughes appealed a decision confirming an order that the patent must be exploited.
Held: The comptroller had the power to make such an order. Parliament could not have intended a deadlock . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.242967
Application for summary judgment.
Held: Granted
Mr Justice Blackburne
[2006] EWHC 522 (Ch)
England and Wales
See Also – HRH the Prince of Wales v Associated Newspapers Ltd ChD 13-Jan-2006
The claimant had for many years kept private journals, whose contents were circulated within a small circle of friends. He now sought to claim confidentiality and copyright in them when the defendant sought to publish them.
Held: There was an . .
Appeal from – Associated Newspapers Ltd v Prince of Wales CA 21-Dec-2006
The defendant newspaper appealed summary judgment against it for breach of confidence and copyright infringement having published the claimant’s journals which he said were private.
Held: Upheld, although the judge had given insufficient . .
Cited – HRH The Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Ltd ChD 11-Feb-2021
Defence had no prospect of success – Struck Out
The claimant complained that the defendant newspaper had published contents from a letter she had sent to her father. The court now considered her claims in breach of privacy and copyright, and her request for summary judgment.
Held: Warby J . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.239189
Appeals were made against interlocutory injunctions for alleged trade mark infringement.
Held: The court should hesitate about making a final decision for summary judgment without a trial, even where there is no obvious conflict of fact at the time of the application, where reasonable grounds exist for believing that a fuller investigation into the facts of the case would add to or alter the evidence available to a trial judge and so affect the outcome of the case.
Mummery LJ warned against the risk of injustice: ‘Summary judgment procedures, which are designed for the swift disposal of straight forward cases without trial, are only available where the applicant demonstrates that the defence (or the claim, as the case may be) has no ‘real’ prospect of success and if there is no other compelling reason why the case or issue should be disposed of at a trial: CPR Part 24.2 . Thus, without the assistance of pre-trial procedures, such as disclosure of documents, and without the benefit of trial procedures, such as cross examination, the court’s function is to decide whether the defendant’s prospect of successfully establishing the facts relied on by him is ‘real’, that is more than ‘fanciful’ or ‘merely arguable.’ and
‘ I also wish to say a few words about the litigation expectations and tactics of claimants and defendants. Claimants start civil proceedings (including intellectual property actions) in the expectation that they will win and often in the belief that the defendant has no real prospect of success. So the defence put forward may be seen as a misconceived, costly and time-wasting ploy designed to dodge an inevitable judgment for as long as possible. There is also a natural inclination on the part of optimistic claimants to go for a quick judgment, if possible, thereby avoiding the trouble, expense and delay involved in preparing for and having a trial.
Everyone would agree that the summary disposal of rubbishy defences is in the interests of justice. The court has to be alert to the defendant, who seeks to avoid summary judgment by making a case look more complicated or difficult than it really is.
The court also has to guard against the cocky claimant, who, having decided to go for summary judgment, confidently presents the factual and legal issues as simpler and easier than they really are and urges the court to be ‘efficient’ ie produce a rapid result in the claimant’s favour.
In handling all applications for summary judgment the court’s duty is to keep considerations of procedural justice in proper perspective. Appropriate procedures must be used for the disposal of cases. Otherwise there is a serious risk of injustice.’
Mr Justice Longmore Lord Justice Mummery Mr Justice Lewison
[2006] EWCA Civ 661, [2007] FSR 3, [2006] ETMR 65
England and Wales
Cited – Nigeria v Santolina Investment Corp and others ChD 7-Mar-2007
The federal government sought to recover properties from the defendants which it said were the proceeds of corrupt behaviour by the principal defendant who had been State Governor of a province. The claimant sought summary judgment.
Held: . .
Cited – Pegasus Management Holdings Sca and Another v Ernst and Young (A Firm) and Another ChD 11-Nov-2008
The claimants alleged professional negligence in advice given by the defendant on a share purchase, saying that it should have been structured to reduce Capital Gains Tax. The defendants denied negligence and said the claim was statute barred.
Cited – Mexfield Housing Co-Operative Ltd v Berrisford ChD 5-Oct-2009
The claimant appealed against refusal of a summary order for possession of the defendant tenant’s house for arrears of rent. The arrears arose through delay in payment of Housing Benefit, and all arrears had been cleared by the hearing of the . .
Cited – Pink Floyd Music Ltd and Another v EMI Records Ltd ChD 11-Mar-2010
The claimant sought summary judgment for a claim under Licensing agreements under which the defendants had marketed and sold the claimant’s products. The remaining disputes concerned differences as to royalties from digital downloads sold through . .
Cited – Sel-Imperial Ltd v The British Standards Institution ChD 23-Apr-2010
The defendant had developed a draft standard for automotive body repairs. It included a requirement that any replacement parts must be either the manufacturer’s own or certified under a recognised conformity certification scheme. The claimant . .
Cited – Parties Named In Schedule A v Dresdner Kleinwort Ltd and Another QBD 28-May-2010
The defendant merchant banks resisted two group claims for annual bonuses for 2008 made by the employee claimants. They now sought summary judgment against the claims. The employer had declared a guaranteed minimum bonus pool available to make the . .
Cited – Meakin v British Broadcasting Corporation and Others ChD 27-Jul-2010
The claimant alleged that the proposal for a game show submitted by him had been used by the various defendants. He alleged breaches of copyright and of confidence. Application was now made to strike out the claim. . .
Cited – Allen v Bloomsbury Publishing Plc and Another ChD 14-Oct-2010
The claimant sought damages alleging breach of copyright by the defendant author saying she had copied large parts of the claimant’s work in her book ‘Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire’. The defendant now sought summary judgment, saying the action . .
Cited – Easyair Ltd (T/A Openair) v Opal Telecom Ltd ChD 2-Mar-2009
Principles Applicable on Summary Judgment Request
The court considered an application for summary judgment.
Held: Lewison J set out the principles: ‘the court must be careful before giving summary judgment on a claim. The correct approach on applications by defendants is, in my judgment, as . .
Cited – Guthrie v Morel and Others ChD 5-Nov-2015
The will had failed clearly to identify a property in Spain the subject of a bequest.
Held: Summary judgment was given. ‘It seems to me to be clear that the deceased intended by his Will to deal with his entire estate and that he intended the . .
Cited – Bhayani and Another v Taylor Bracewell Llp IPEC 22-Dec-2016
Distinction between reputation and goodwill
The claimant had practised independently as an employment solicitor. For a period, she was a partner with the defendant firm practising under the name ‘Bhayani Bracewell’. Having departed the firm, she now objected to the continued use of her name, . .
Cited – HRH The Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Ltd ChD 11-Feb-2021
Defence had no prospect of success – Struck Out
The claimant complained that the defendant newspaper had published contents from a letter she had sent to her father. The court now considered her claims in breach of privacy and copyright, and her request for summary judgment.
Held: Warby J . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.242215
Mann, The Honourable Mr Justice Mann
[2004] EWHC 630 (Ch), [2004] RPC 36, (2004) 27(7) IPD 27071
England and Wales
Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.195030
ECJ Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Protection of geographical indications of spirit drinks – Regulation (EC) No 110/2008 – Article 16(b) – Evocation – Cider spirits produced in Finland and placed on the market as ‘Verlados’ – Protected geographical indication ‘Calvados’
C-75/15, [2016] EUECJ C-75/15, ECLI:EU:C:2016:35
European
Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.559494
Trade Mark: Opposition
[2013] UKIntelP o07813
England and Wales
Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.472218
ECJ Community trade mark – Application for the Community figurative mark MEDINET – Earlier national and international figurative marks MEDINET – Claim of seniority of the earlier national and international marks – Earlier marks in colour and Community trade mark applied for not designating any specific colour – Signs not identical – Article 34 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 – Obligation to state reasons – Article 75 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 – Expediency of oral proceedings – Article 77 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009
S. Papasavvas, P
T-378/11, [2013] EUECJ T-378/11
European
Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.471212
Trade Mark: Opposition
[2013] UKIntelP o07513
England and Wales
Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.472228
ECFI Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for Community word mark RESVEROL – Earlier international word mark LESTEROL – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Similarity of the signs – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009.
T-363/09, [2010] EUECJ T-363/09
European
Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.427710
ECFI Community trade mark – Application for Community word mark KOMPRESSOR PLUS – Absolute ground for refusal – Descriptive character – Article 7, paragraph 1, sub c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009.
T-497/09, [2010] EUECJ T-497/09
European
Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.427709
Action for breach of confidence.
David Cooke J
[2009] EWHC 1331 (Ch)
England and Wales
Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.346868
Europa Community trade mark Opposition proceedings Applications for Community word and figurative marks BUD Appellations ‘bud’ Relative grounds for refusal Article 8(4) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94.
T-309/06, [2008] EUECJ T-309/06
Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94
Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.279128
Europa Community trade mark Opposition proceedings Applications for Community word and figurative marks BUD Appellations ‘bud’ Relative grounds for refusal Article 8(4) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94.
T-257/06, [2008] EUECJ T-257/06
Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.279127
ECFI Community trade mark Opposition proceedings Applications for Community word and figurative marks BUD Appellations ‘bud’ Relative grounds for refusal Article 8(4) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94.
T-225/06, [2008] EUECJ T-225/06, [2013] EUECJ T-225/06
Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.279125
ECJ Opinion – Validity of Regulations (EEC) No 2081/92 and (EC) No 1347/2001 Admissibility – Protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs – Geographical indication ‘Bayerisches Bier’ Trade mark ‘Bavaria’ Procedural and substantive requirements of registration – Co-existence between trade mark and protected geographical indication.
Mazak AG
C-343/07, [2008] EUECJ C-343/07 – O
Opinion – Bavaria and Bavaria Italia SrL v Bayerischer Brauerbund eV ECJ 2-Jul-2009
ECJ Reference for a preliminary ruling Assessment of validity Admissibility Regulations (EEC) No 2081/92 and (EC) No 1347/2001 – Validity – Generic name Coexistence of a trade mark and a protected geographical . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.279122
Claim for infringement of a Community Trade Mark (‘CTM’) and for passing-off between companies involved in the craft and hobby kit business. There is a counterclaim for a declaration of invalidity of the CTM. At this stage I am concerned with liability but not with damages.
Mackie QC HHJ
[2008] EWHC 2723 (Ch)
Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.278841
Arnold J
[2008] EWHC 3032 (Ch)
Appeal from – Hotel Cipriani Srl and Others v Cipriani (Grosvenor Street) Ltd and Others CA 24-Feb-2010
The claimants owned Community and UK trade marks in the name ‘Cipriani’. The defendants operated a restaurant in London using, under the licence of another defendant, the same name. The claimant sought an injunction to prevent further use of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.278849
[2008] EWHC 2489 (Pat)
England and Wales
Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.278783
[2008] EWHC 3070 (Pat)
Appeal from – Napp Pharmaceutical Holdings Ltd v Ratiopharm Gmbh CA 1-Apr-2009
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.278788
[2008] EWCA Civ 1415
England and Wales
Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.278780
ECJ Community trade mark Opposition proceedings Application for the Community word mark Barbara Becker Earlier Community word mark BECKER Relative ground for refusal Likelihood of confusion Similarity of the signs Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94.
T-212/07, [2008] EUECJ T-212/07
Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.278370
[2008] EWCA Civ 1260
England and Wales
Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.278285
The defendant had acquired illegal tapes of telephone conversations which it said implicated the plaintiff. He sought to restrain publication of the material pending forthcoming discliplinary charges at the Jockey Club.
Held: The court had to find a balance of justice. The court spoke of the media and the public interest.
Sir John Donaldson MR said: ‘The media, to use a term which comprises not only the newspapers, but also television and radio, are an essential foundation of any democracy. In exposing crime, anti-social behaviour and hypocrisy, and in campaigning for reform and propagating the views of minorities, they perform an invaluable function. However, they are peculiarly vulnerable to the error of confusing the public interest with their own interest. Usually these interests march hand in hand, but not always. In the instant case, pending a trial, it is impossible to see what public interest would be served by publishing the contents of the tape which would not equally be served by giving them to the police or to the Jockey Club. Any wider publication could only serve the interests of the Daily Mirror.’
The public interest may better be served by passing information to the police than publishing it. If it turns out that the suspicions are without foundation, the confidence can then still be protected.
Sir John Donaldson MR
[1984] 1 WLR 892
England and Wales
Cited – Lion Laboratories Ltd v Evans CA 1985
Lion Laboratories manufactured and marketed the Lion Intoximeter which was used by the police for measuring blood alcohol levels of motorists. Two ex-employees approached the Press with four documents taken from Lion. The documents indicated that . .
Cited – Hyde Park Residence Ltd v Yelland, News Group Newspapers Ltd, News International Ltd, Murrell CA 10-Feb-2000
The court considered a dispute about ownership and confidence in and copyright of of video tapes taken by Princess Diana before her death.
Held: The courts have an inherent discretion to refuse to enforce of copyright. When assessing whether . .
Cited – Partenaire Ltd v Department of Finance and Personnel QBNI 23-Nov-2007
Application to extend an interim injunction. . .
Cited – Henry Brothers (Magherafelt) Ltd and others v Department of Education for Northern Ireland QBNI 21-Dec-2007
. .
Cited – Derry City Council v Information Commissioner IT 11-Nov-2006
. .
Cited – Derry City Council v Information Commissioner IT 11-Dec-2006
. .
Cited – Cream Holdings Limited and others v Banerjee and The Liverpool Daily Post and Echo Limited CA 13-Feb-2003
The defendants considered publication of alleged financial irregularities by the claimant, who sought to restrain publication. The defendants argued that under the Act, prior restraint should not be used unless a later court would be likely to . .
Cited – Mosley v News Group Newspapers Ltd QBD 24-Jul-2008
The defendant published a film showing the claimant involved in sex acts with prostitutes. It characterised them as ‘Nazi’ style. He was the son of a fascist leader, and a chairman of an international sporting body. He denied any nazi element, and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.223826
[2008] EWHC 2715 (Ch)
England and Wales
Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.278219
The claimant sought damages. The defendant firm of solicitors had represented the claimant’s wife in matrimonial procedings, and had used in evidence documents which the claimant said had been taken from him and were confidential.
Held: The claim was struck out. Any claim would be for nominal damages only, but was struck out for disclosing no cause of action.
Eady J
[2008] EWHC 2821 (QB)
England and Wales
Applied – Hildebrand v Hildebrand 1992
The parties in ancillary relief proceedings sought orders for discovery. H had been to the wife’s flat surreptitiously on five occasions, and taken photocopies of so many documents obtained by him in the course of those visits (but returned after . .
Cited – White v Withers Llp and Dearle CA 27-Oct-2009
The claimant was involved in matrimonial ancillary relief proceedings. His wife was advised by the defendants, her solicitors, to remove his private papers. The claimant now sought permission to appeal against a strike out of his claim against the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.277903
Morgan J
[2008] EWHC 2688 (Ch)
England and Wales
See Also – Bookmakers Afternoon Greyhound Services Ltd and others v Amalgamated Racing Ltd and others ChD 8-Aug-2008
Various racecourses had combined together to sell the rights to televise their races to bookmakers. The bookmakers complained that the combination was anti-competitive and in breach of European law. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.277736
[2008] EWHC 2503 (Ch)
England and Wales
Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.277327
The court heard an appeal against a finding that the defendant had infringed the patent belonging to the claimant relating to a coating used to protect printed circuit boards.
[2008] EWCA Civ 1161
England and Wales
Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.277112
Warren J
[2008] EWHC 881 (Ch), [2008] RPC 30, (2008) 31(6) IPD 31040
England and Wales
Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.267088
Norris J
[2008] EWHC 263 (Ch)
England and Wales
See Also – Anheuser-Busch Inc v Budejovicky Budvar Narodni Podnik; Budejovicky Budvar Narodni Podnik v Anheuser Busch Inc ChD 20-May-1998
It is possible to grant two identical trade marks in respect of beer where either there was no confusion, or an honest concurrent use could justify such double registrations. . .
See Also – Anheuser-Busch Inc v Budejovicky Bodvar Narodni Podnik; Budejovicky Bodvar Narodni Podnik v Anheuser-Busch CA 7-Feb-2000
The registration of two trade marks (‘Budweiser’) with the identical names was against the Act since it would appear to encourage the very confusion the Act sought to avoid. Nevertheless, where there was genuine honest concurrent use, that use might . .
See Also – Podnik v Anheuser-Busch Inc CA 29-Oct-2002
. .
See Also – Anheuser-Busch Inc v Budejovicky Budvar CA 1984
The plaintiff sold the well-known ‘Budweiser’ beer in the US, but it was not generally available in the UK, being sold in American military bases and in a few duty-free shops. However, the beer was widely known throughout the UK because of the . .
See Also – Anheuser-Busch v Budejovicky Budvar, narodni podnik ECJ 16-Nov-2004
Agreement establishing the World Trade Organisation – Articles 2(1), 16(1) and 70 of the TRIPs Agreement – Trade marks – Scope of the proprietor’s exclusive right to the trade mark – Alleged use of the sign as a trade name. . .
See Also – Budejovicky Budvar Narodni Podnik v Anheuser-Busch Inc CA 20-Oct-2009
The parties had long disputed the use of the trade marks ‘Bud’ and ‘Budweiser’ for their beers. The claimant now said that the defendants had made an abusive registration under the 1994 Act, by requesting a declaration that the registration by the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.264597
(Intellectual Property)
C-412/05, [2006] EUECJ C-412/05 – O
European
Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.246016
The defendant sought to advertise its new TV listings magazine, and to do so reproduced in its advert a copy of the front page of the equivalent magazine published by the claimant. The claimant sought damages for copyright infringement. The defendant claimed fair dealing.
Held: The claim succeeded: ‘The claimant has devoted its skill and labour in the production of literary and artistic work for the very purpose of identifying its product for its own commercial purposes. In copying the work to advance its own competing commercial purposes at the expense of the claimants, the defendant was taking advantage of the fact that the claimant’s work has created that literary/artistic identity for its product. I do not think that that can be described as a fair dealing ‘in the context of’ or ‘as part of an exercise in’ or ‘for the purpose of the criticism or review of’ the claimant’s work. If it is not fair dealing for that purpose, as I do not think it is, it cannot in my judgment be fair dealing for the purpose of reporting current events.’
Such criticism as there was could have been done without it, and in copying the work to advance its own competing purposes at the claimant’s expense the defendant was advancing its own work, and that did not amount to fair dealing.
Hart J
[2005] EWHC 317 (Ch), [2005] EMLR 23, [2005] FSR 35
Copyright Design and Patents Act 1988 30(1)
England and Wales
Cited – Pro Sieben Media AG v Carlton Television Ltd and Another CA 7-Jan-1999
The defendant was accused of infringing copyright in a TV programme relating to the pregnancy of a woman with eight foetuses. The defendant claimed fair dealing, but that defence was rejected by the trial judge.
Held: The decision was . .
Cited – Ashdown v Telegraph Group Ltd CA 18-Jul-2001
The appellant complained that a part of his confidential diaries had been republished without his consent by the defendant newspaper group. The defendant appealed, saying that the publication was fair dealing.
Held: The exceptions within the . .
Cited – Fraser-Woodward Ltd v British Broadcasting Corporation Brighter Pictures Ltd ChD 23-Mar-2005
The claimant asserted infringement of copyright by the defendants in photographs of the family of David Beckham. The defendant admitted using the photographs but asserted that no permission was required since the use was a fair dealing.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.263689
(Court of Appeal of New Zealand) A photographer was commissioned to take photographs of the children of a well known television personality. He took pictures of Mr Hosking’s eighteen month old twins being pushed down a street by their mother. Mr and Mrs Hosking sought injunctions to prevent publication of the photograph relying on a cause of action for breach of confidence and for breach of privacy.
Held: The court identified two distinct versions of the tort of breach of confidence in English law: ‘One is the long-standing cause of action under which remedies are available in respect of use or disclosure where the information has been communicated in confidence. Subject to possible ‘trivia’ exceptions and to public interest (iniquity) defences, those remedies are available irrespective of the ‘offensiveness’ of the disclosure. The second gives a right of action in respect of publication of personal information of which the subject has a reasonable expectation of privacy irrespective of any burden of confidence.’
The taking of photographs in a public street must be taken to be one of the ordinary incidents of living in a free community, and there was no cause of action in tort for breach of privacy based upon the publication of photographs taken in a public place and the action for breach of confidence required there to be established a reasonable expectation of privacy in respect of matters whose publication would be considered highly offensive to an objective reasonable person.
Gault P, Keith J, Blanchard J, Tipping J, Anderson J
[2004] NZCA 34, [2005] 1 NZLR 1, (2004) 7 HRNZ 301
England and Wales
Applied – Australian Broadcasting Corporation v Lenah Game Meats Pty Ltd 15-Nov-2001
(High Court of Australia) The activities of a company which processed possum meat for export (‘what the processing of possums looks,and sounds like’) were not such as to attract the quality of being confidential for the purpose of the law protecting . .
Criticised – Associated Newspapers Ltd v Prince of Wales CA 21-Dec-2006
The defendant newspaper appealed summary judgment against it for breach of confidence and copyright infringement having published the claimant’s journals which he said were private.
Held: Upheld, although the judge had given insufficient . .
Cited – Murray v Express Newspapers Plc and Another ChD 7-Aug-2007
The claimant, now aged four and the son of a famous author, was photographed by use of a long lens, but in a public street. He now sought removal of the photograph from the defendant’s catalogue, and damages for breach of confidence.
Held: The . .
Cited – Murray v Big Pictures (UK) Ltd; Murray v Express Newspapers CA 7-May-2008
The claimant, a famous writer, complained on behalf of her infant son that he had been photographed in a public street with her, and that the photograph had later been published in a national newspaper. She appealed an order striking out her claim . .
Cited – Weller and Others v Associated Newspapers Ltd CA 20-Nov-2015
The three children of a musician complained of the publication of photographs taken of them in a public place in California. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.247606
Claim for summary judgement in claim for copyright infringement by faciitation of peer to peer (P2P) networking to copy music over the internet.
Lawrence Collins J
[2005] EWHC 3191 (Ch)
Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988
England and Wales
Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.263703
The Sun printed copyright letters which had passed between the late Duke and Duchess of Windsor, but the exclusive rights to which had been obtained by another newspaper. As to dicta that use by a competitor is not fair: ‘That seems to be exactly what has happened in the present case. There is no blinking the fact that the Sun is trying to attract readers by means of printing these letters or extracts from letters.’
Walton J
[1986] RPC 515
England and Wales
Cited – Hubbard v Vosper CA 1971
Claims of infringement were made as to copyright works being various works about Scientology. Extracts had appeared in the defendant’s book which was critical of the cult. It was submitted by the plaintiff that the fair dealing section applied only . .
Cited – Fraser-Woodward Ltd v British Broadcasting Corporation Brighter Pictures Ltd ChD 23-Mar-2005
The claimant asserted infringement of copyright by the defendants in photographs of the family of David Beckham. The defendant admitted using the photographs but asserted that no permission was required since the use was a fair dealing.
Held: . .
Cited – Hyde Park Residence Ltd v Yelland, News Group Newspapers Ltd, News International Ltd, Murrell CA 10-Feb-2000
The court considered a dispute about ownership and confidence in and copyright of of video tapes taken by Princess Diana before her death.
Held: The courts have an inherent discretion to refuse to enforce of copyright. When assessing whether . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.223817
The court considered what would amount to fair dealing in copyright
Unreported, 24 August 1983, CAT No. 830 of 1983
England and Wales
Mentioned – Hyde Park Residence Ltd v Yelland, News Group Newspapers Ltd, News International Ltd, Murrell CA 10-Feb-2000
The court considered a dispute about ownership and confidence in and copyright of of video tapes taken by Princess Diana before her death.
Held: The courts have an inherent discretion to refuse to enforce of copyright. When assessing whether . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.223820
Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Earlier word marks MUNDICOLOR – Application for Community word mark MUNDICOR – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94.
T-183/02, [2004] EUECJ T-183/02
European
Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.195061
The defendant to an action for an injunction by the plaintiff on behalf of the British Phonographic Industry Copyright Society, said that the company did not properly represent the members of the Society.
Held: It could be inferred that all relevant members of a copyright society would wish to suppress counterfeit goods, and so they had a sufficient common interest to allow a representative action by the society acting through the plaintiff. Allowing a representative action would avoid substantial and unnecessary complications of each member of the class pursuing a separate action.
Dillon J
[1981] 1 All ER 838, [1981] 1 WLR 923
England and Wales
Distinguished – Prudential Assurance Co Ltd v Newman Industries Ltd ChD 1979
Members of the defendant company had approved in general meeting, of an acquisition of the assets of another company in which its directors were substantially interested. The shareholders’ approval was given on the basis of a circular. The action . .
Cited – Independiente Ltd and others v Music Trading On-Line (HK) Ltd and others ChD 13-Mar-2003
The claimants claimed damages for the sale by the defendants in the UK of CD’s manufactured for sale only in the far East. The defendants challenged the right of a claimant phonographic society to have the right to sue on behalf of its members.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.179755
Sections 5(1), 5(2) and 5(3) Earlier Trade Marks – Particular visual / aural / conceptual considerations
Sections 5(1), 5(2) and 5(3) Average Customer – Importance of end user / consumer
Sections 5(1), 5(2) and 5(3) Average Customer – Consumer attention levels
Sections 5(1), 5(2) and 5(3) Average Customer – Purchasing process
Sections 5(1), 5(2) and 5(3) Dilution Cases – Reputation
Sections 5(1), 5(2) and 5(3) Dilution Cases – Link
[2018] UKIntelP o82218
England and Wales
Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.631773
Application for summary judgment on claim or for strike out of parts of defence
Treacy DJ
[2019] EWHC 1872 (Ch)
England and Wales
Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.640072
Application for revocation of two packaging patents.
Hacon HHJ
[2019] EWHC 2119 (IPEC)
England and Wales
Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.640092