Urban Ventures Pty Limited v Solitaire Homes Pty Limited [2010] FCA 1373

Urban Ventures Pty Limited v Solitaire Homes Pty Limited [2010] FCA 1373

Urban Design and Jaime Charles Farrelly infringed Solitaire Homes' copyright in the plans of the Solitaire house. Mr Farrelly was personally liable as the direct creator of the infringing plans. Compensatory damages of $10,000 were appropriate, representing 25% of the usual profit on project home design and construction. Additional damages awarded under s 115(4) of the Copyright Act should be $10,000, reflecting deliberate infringement, conduct after infringement, and need for general deterrence in the architectural drafting industry.

Parties
Appellant / First Cross Respondent: Urban Ventures Pty Limited (ACN 098 192 806) trading as Urban Design and Drafting; Respondent / Cross Appellant: Solitaire Homes Pty Limited (ACN 093 864 923); Second Cross Respondent: Jaime Charles Farrelly
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 December 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal and Cross Appeal / Judgment After Hearing on Appeal and Cross Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; cross-appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Copyright Infringement, Compensatory Damages, Additional Damages, Personal Liability of Director, General Deterrence
Intellectual Property Copyright Copyright Infringement Compensatory Damages Additional Damages Personal Liability of Director General Deterrence

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 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Urban Ventures Pty Limited (ACN 098 192 806) trading as Urban Design and Drafting

Appellant / First Cross Respondent

Solitaire Homes Pty Limited (ACN 093 864 923)

Respondent / Cross Appellant

Jaime Charles Farrelly

Second Cross Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal and Cross Appeal / Judgment After Hearing on Appeal and Cross Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Did Urban Design and Jaime Charles Farrelly infringe copyright in the plans for the Solitaire house?
  2. 2 Is compensatory and additional damages under ss 115(2) and 115(4) of the Copyright Act appropriate and at what quantum?
  3. 3 Is Jaime Charles Farrelly personally liable for the infringement?

Ratio Decidendi

Urban Design and Jaime Charles Farrelly infringed Solitaire Homes' copyright in the plans of the Solitaire house. Mr Farrelly was personally liable as the direct creator of the infringing plans. Compensatory damages of $10,000 were appropriate, representing 25% of the usual profit on project home design and construction. Additional damages awarded under s 115(4) of the Copyright Act should be $10,000, reflecting deliberate infringement, conduct after infringement, and need for general deterrence in the architectural drafting industry.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; cross-appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • The cross-appeal is allowed in part.