Concrete Pty Ltd v Parramatta Design & Developments Pty Ltd and Anor [2004] FCA 293

Concrete Pty Ltd v Parramatta Design & Developments Pty Ltd and Anor [2004] FCA 293

The separate questions proposed do not sufficiently align with the key issues between the parties, and their determination would not achieve sufficient efficiency; further, the applicant's proceedings are defensive under s 202 of the Copyright Act, and security for costs is not warranted. Both applications are dismissed.

Parties
Applicant/cross Respondent: Concrete Pty Ltd; First Respondent/cross Claimant: Parramatta Design & Developments Pty Ltd; Second Respondent: Ghassan Fares
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 March 2004
Procedural Posture
Practice and Procedure (federal Court) / Interlocutory Application for Determination of Separate Questions and Security for Costs Prior to Final Hearing
Outcome
Application for determination of separate questions and security for costs dismissed
Legal Topics
Separate Questions, Security for Costs, Implied Licence (copyright), Case Management
Practice and Procedure Copyright Law Separate Questions Security for Costs Implied Licence (copyright) Case Management

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 3 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Concrete Pty Ltd

Applicant/cross Respondent

Parramatta Design & Developments Pty Ltd

First Respondent/cross Claimant

Ghassan Fares

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Practice and Procedure (federal Court) / Interlocutory Application for Determination of Separate Questions and Security for Costs Prior to Final Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether it is just and convenient to determine separate questions in advance of the final hearing
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to an implied licence to use architectural plans under copyright law
  3. 3 Whether separate determination would dispose of proceedings or result in efficiency

Ratio Decidendi

The separate questions proposed do not sufficiently align with the key issues between the parties, and their determination would not achieve sufficient efficiency; further, the applicant's proceedings are defensive under s 202 of the Copyright Act, and security for costs is not warranted. Both applications are dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for determination of separate questions and security for costs dismissed

Orders

  • The application the subject of notice of motion filed on 24 February 2004 be dismissed.
  • The first respondent/cross-claimant and the second respondent pay the applicant's costs of the motion.