Led Builders P/L v. Masterton Homes (NSW) P/L [1994] FCA 884

Led Builders P/L v. Masterton Homes (NSW) P/L [1994] FCA 884

Copyright subsisted in the applicant's house plans as original works produced with significant skill and labour. The first respondent deliberately traced and copied a substantial part of these plans, amounting to copyright infringement. The applicant was not barred by laches, acquiescence, or delay as there was no evidence of the respondent being encouraged to believe the rights would not be enforced, nor prejudice proved. The applicant is therefore entitled to remedies including injunction and, at its election, damages (for infringements within limitation period) or account of profits (from time of original infringement).

Parties
Applicant: LED Builders Pty Limited; First Respondent: Masterton Homes (NSW) Pty Limited; First Cross Claimant: Masterton Homes (NSW) Pty Limited; Second Respondent/second Cross Claimant: Masterton Homes Pty Limited; Cross Respondent: LED Builders Pty Limited
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 November 1994
Procedural Posture
Civil / First Instance Judgment
Outcome
Applicant's claim for copyright infringement upheld; issue of quantum and remedies (damages/account of profits, injunction) stood over for further hearing.
Legal Topics
Copyright, Architectural Plans, Builders' Plans, Infringement, Originality, Remedies, Laches, Acquiescence, Delay
Intellectual Property Copyright Architectural Plans Builders' Plans Infringement Originality Remedies Laches +2 more

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 7 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

LED Builders Pty Limited

Applicant

Masterton Homes (NSW) Pty Limited

First Respondent

Masterton Homes (NSW) Pty Limited

First Cross Claimant

Masterton Homes Pty Limited

Second Respondent/second Cross Claimant

LED Builders Pty Limited

Cross Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil / First Instance Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether copyright subsisted in the applicant's plans for project houses
  2. 2 Whether the respondents infringed the applicant's copyright by copying those plans
  3. 3 Whether the applicant's claim was barred by laches, acquiescence or delay

Ratio Decidendi

Copyright subsisted in the applicant's house plans as original works produced with significant skill and labour. The first respondent deliberately traced and copied a substantial part of these plans, amounting to copyright infringement. The applicant was not barred by laches, acquiescence, or delay as there was no evidence of the respondent being encouraged to believe the rights would not be enforced, nor prejudice proved. The applicant is therefore entitled to remedies including injunction and, at its election, damages (for infringements within limitation period) or account of profits (from time of original infringement).

Court Disposition

Applicant's claim for copyright infringement upheld; issue of quantum and remedies (damages/account of profits, injunction) stood over for further hearing.