Pearce v Ove Arup Partnership Ltd and others: CA 21 Jan 1999

An English court does not have to refuse an application which sought to apply a foreign copyright law in a claim based on acts committed abroad on the basis that not actionable here. Such restrictions applicable to land actions only: ‘It is, we think, clear from an analysis of the judgments in the Mocambique case that the House of Lords treated the question whether the English courts should entertain an action for trespass to foreign land as one of justiciability. The English courts should not claim jurisdiction to adjudicate upon matters which, under generally accepted principles of private international law, were the peculiar province and competence of another state . . ‘
Gazette 03-Mar-1999, Times 10-Feb-1999, [1999] EWCA Civ 625, [2000] Ch D 402, [1999] 1 All ER 769
England and Wales
Appeal fromPearce v Ove Arup Partnership Ltd and Others ChD 17-Mar-1997
A UK court may not decline jurisdiction in enforcing Dutch copyright law if it is asked to do so. . .
CitedBritish South Africa Company v Companhia de Mocambique HL 1893
Two companies, one Portuguese, the other British and controlled by Cecil Rhodes, were in dispute about a large territory called Manica. The Portuguese company complained that they owned lands and mineral rights in Manica yet the British company had . .

Cited by:
CitedChagos Islanders v The Attorney General, Her Majesty’s British Indian Ocean Territory Commissioner QBD 9-Oct-2003
The Chagos Islands had been a British dependent territory since 1814. The British government repatriated the islanders in the 1960s, and the Ilois now sought damages for their wrongful displacement, misfeasance, deceit, negligence and to establish a . .
CitedR Griggs Group Ltd and others v Evans and others (No 2) ChD 12-May-2004
A logo had been created for the claimants, by an independent sub-contractor. They sought assignment of their legal title, but, knowing of the claimant’s interest the copyright was assigned to a third party out of the jurisdiction. The claimant . .
CitedSawyer v Atari Interactive Inc CA 2-Mar-2007
The claimant designed games software and complained of infringements by the defendant of licensing agreements by failing to allow audits as required.
Held: The defendant should be allowed to be heard on the standard practices for management of . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 14 May 2021; Ref: scu.145540