Ownit Homes Pty Ltd & Ors v D. & F. Mancuso Investments Pty Ltd & Ors [1988] FCA 202

Ownit Homes Pty Ltd & Ors v D. & F. Mancuso Investments Pty Ltd & Ors [1988] FCA 202

There was no substantial reproduction of the Envoy Series 2 architectural plans by the respondents; only the concept or idea behind the plans was adopted and not the expression. Thus, copyright was not infringed.

Parties
First Appellant: OWNIT HOMES PTY. LTD.; Second Appellant: DAUDI PTY. LTD.; Third Appellant: JEFFDET OSMAN; First Respondent: D. & F. MANCUSO INVESTMENTS PTY. LTD.; Second Respondent: DOMENICO MANCUSO; Third Respondent: TONY MANCUSO; Third Respondent: ANGELA MANCUSO
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 April 1988
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Post Trial Appeal From Supreme Court of Queensland
Outcome
The appeal is dismissed.
Legal Topics
Copyright Infringement, Architectural Plans, Original Artistic Work, Qualitative Assessment of Similarity, Substantial Reproduction, Copying of Ideas
Copyright Copyright Infringement Architectural Plans Original Artistic Work Qualitative Assessment of Similarity Substantial Reproduction Copying of Ideas

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

OWNIT HOMES PTY. LTD.

First Appellant

DAUDI PTY. LTD.

Second Appellant

JEFFDET OSMAN

Third Appellant

D. & F. MANCUSO INVESTMENTS PTY. LTD.

First Respondent

DOMENICO MANCUSO

Second Respondent

TONY MANCUSO

Third Respondent

ANGELA MANCUSO

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Post Trial Appeal From Supreme Court of Queensland

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondents infringed copyright in the Envoy Series 2 architectural plans
  2. 2 Whether substantial reproduction or copying occurred
  3. 3 Whether the plans constituted original artistic work and in whom copyright was vested

Ratio Decidendi

There was no substantial reproduction of the Envoy Series 2 architectural plans by the respondents; only the concept or idea behind the plans was adopted and not the expression. Thus, copyright was not infringed.

Court Disposition

The appeal is dismissed.

Orders

  • The appeal be dismissed.
  • The appellants do pay to the respondents their costs of the appeal.