Masterton Homes Pty Ltd & Anor v L E D Builders Pty Ltd [1996] FCA 171

Masterton Homes Pty Ltd & Anor v L E D Builders Pty Ltd [1996] FCA 171

The appeal failed because the primary judge's factual conclusions were open on the evidence: the appellants had access to the respondent's plans or fliers, there were substantial similarities between the relevant drawings, and the only credible explanation for exhibit N1 was deliberate copying or tracing by Mr Masterton. No basis was shown for appellate interference with the adverse credibility finding. The equitable defences also failed because the respondent did not do anything beyond mere delay to encourage a belief that it would not enforce its rights, the appellants did not prove such a belief or prejudice from acting on it, and it was not shown that lost evidence would have cast a...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 March 1996
Procedural Posture
Appeal From a Judge of the Federal Court of Australia in Copyright Infringement Proceedings / Full Court Appeal; Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['copyright Infringement by Copying Project House Plans' 'subsistence of Copyright in Drawings' 'credibility Findings on Appeal' 'laches, Acquiescence and Delay' 'equitable Relief and Account of Profits']
['copyright' 'evidence' 'equity'] ['copyright Infringement by Copying Project House Plans' 'subsistence of Copyright in Drawings' 'credibility Findings on Appeal' 'laches, Acquiescence and Delay' 'equitable Relief and Account of Profits']

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

Appeal From a Judge of the Federal Court of Australia in Copyright Infringement Proceedings / Full Court Appeal; Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the primary judge erred in finding that the appellants deliberately copied or traced the respondent's house plans and infringed copyright." "Whether the primary judge's adverse credibility finding against Mr W J Masterton should be overturned on appeal." 'Whether the respondent should be denied relief because of laches, acquiescence or delay.' "Whether delay impaired the appellants' ability to defend the claim by impeding witnesses' recollection or causing loss of evidence."]

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal failed because the primary judge's factual conclusions were open on the evidence: the appellants had access to the respondent's plans or fliers, there were substantial similarities between the relevant drawings, and the only credible explanation for exhibit N1 was deliberate copying or tracing by Mr Masterton. No basis was shown for appellate interference with the adverse credibility finding. The equitable defences also failed because the respondent did not do anything beyond mere delay to encourage a belief that it would not enforce its rights, the appellants did not prove such a belief or prejudice from acting on it, and it was not shown that lost evidence would have cast a...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The appeal be dismissed.' 'The appellants pay the costs of the respondent of the appeal.']