Young v Wyllie [2010] FCA 1098

Young v Wyllie [2010] FCA 1098

Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant did not show that the primary judge's refusal to grant summary judgment, or the costs orders, were attended by sufficient doubt warranting appellate reconsideration, nor that refusal of leave would cause substantial prejudice. The applicant's construction of s 103(1) of the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) ignored the statutory requirement that the person knew or ought reasonably to have known that making the article constituted an infringement, and was not tenable. The primary judge's preliminary view that selling or offering DVDs for sale on the Internet was not communicating the film to the public under s 86(c) did not warrant appeal at the...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 October 2010
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Judgments Refusing Summary Judgment and Dealing With Costs / Heard on the Papers
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
['leave to Appeal' 'interlocutory Orders' 'summary Judgment' 'copyright Infringement' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'costs Following the Event' 'cost Capping']
['copyright' 'consumer Law' 'civil Procedure' 'costs'] ['leave to Appeal' 'interlocutory Orders' 'summary Judgment' 'copyright Infringement' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'costs Following the Event' 'cost Capping']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Judgments Refusing Summary Judgment and Dealing With Costs / Heard on the Papers

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave to appeal should be granted from interlocutory orders made on 30 March 2010 and 17 June 2010.' "Whether the primary judge's refusal to grant summary judgment was attended by sufficient doubt to warrant appellate reconsideration." 'Whether refusal of leave would cause substantial prejudice to the applicant.' "Whether the applicant's construction of s 103(1) of the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) supported summary judgment for copyright infringement." 'Whether selling or offering DVDs for sale on the Internet amounted to communicating the film to the public under s 86(c) of the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth).' "Whether the primary judge's costs discretion miscarried."]

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant did not show that the primary judge's refusal to grant summary judgment, or the costs orders, were attended by sufficient doubt warranting appellate reconsideration, nor that refusal of leave would cause substantial prejudice. The applicant's construction of s 103(1) of the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) ignored the statutory requirement that the person knew or ought reasonably to have known that making the article constituted an infringement, and was not tenable. The primary judge's preliminary view that selling or offering DVDs for sale on the Internet was not communicating the film to the public under s 86(c) did not warrant appeal at the...

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal refused.

Orders

  • ['The application for leave to appeal is refused.' "The applicant pay the first, second, seventh, eighth and ninth respondents' costs of the application on a party and party basis."]