Compagnie Industrielle de Precontrainte et D'Equipment des Constructions SA v First Melbourne Securities Pty Ltd [1999] FCA 660

Compagnie Industrielle de Precontrainte et D'Equipment des Constructions SA v First Melbourne Securities Pty Ltd [1999] FCA 660

The respondents, by directly or indirectly authorising and producing drawings and expansion joints based on CIPEC's copyright design and manufacturing drawings, reproduced substantial parts of CIPEC's artistic works without licence. The defence under s 77 of the Copyright Act did not apply as the drawings were not 'designs' for the purposes of the Designs Act as they lacked appeal to the eye and were dictated solely by functional considerations.

Parties
Applicant: Compagnie Industrielle de Precontrainte et D'Equipment des Constructions SA; First Respondent: First Melbourne Securities Pty Ltd; Second Respondent: CIPEC Australasia Pty Ltd; Third Respondent: Michael Mossonidis (also known as Michael Moss); Fourth Respondent: Lisa Thomas
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 May 1999
Procedural Posture
Copyright Infringement / Final Judgment at Trial
Outcome
Applicant succeeded in part; principal copyright infringement claims upheld; some other claims dismissed; costs awarded to applicant.
Legal Topics
Copyright, Artistic Works, Industrial Designs, Designs Act, Copyright Act, Authorisation of Infringement
Intellectual Property Copyright Artistic Works Industrial Designs Designs Act Copyright Act Authorisation of Infringement

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 6 Authorities cited 31 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Compagnie Industrielle de Precontrainte et D'Equipment des Constructions SA

Applicant

First Melbourne Securities Pty Ltd

First Respondent

CIPEC Australasia Pty Ltd

Second Respondent

Michael Mossonidis (also known as Michael Moss)

Third Respondent

Lisa Thomas

Fourth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Copyright Infringement / Final Judgment at Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether respondents infringed applicant's copyright in engineering drawings for expansion joints
  2. 2 Whether there was sufficient similarity between copyright drawings and respondents' drawings and produced joints
  3. 3 Whether the copyright drawings constitute a 'corresponding design' under the Designs Act

Ratio Decidendi

The respondents, by directly or indirectly authorising and producing drawings and expansion joints based on CIPEC's copyright design and manufacturing drawings, reproduced substantial parts of CIPEC's artistic works without licence. The defence under s 77 of the Copyright Act did not apply as the drawings were not 'designs' for the purposes of the Designs Act as they lacked appeal to the eye and were dictated solely by functional considerations.

Court Disposition

Applicant succeeded in part; principal copyright infringement claims upheld; some other claims dismissed; costs awarded to applicant.

Orders

  • CIPEC Australasia Pty Ltd infringed copyright by authorising the making of certain drawings.
  • First Melbourne Securities Pty Ltd infringed copyright by authorising or making specified drawings and extruded sections.