William Heinemann Ltd v Kyte-Powell [1960] HCA 32
Special leave to appeal refused because the magistrate was positively satisfied, on the material before him, that the publishing was not justified within the meaning of s. 180, rendering investigation of material sufficiency unnecessary.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Procedural Posture
- Special Leave Application / Special Leave Refused
- Outcome
- special leave refused
- Legal Topics
- ['copyright' 'literary Merit' 'appeal Procedure']
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
Procedural Posture
Special Leave Application / Special Leave Refused
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Interpretation of s. 180 regarding works of literary or artistic merit' 'Justification of publishing under Pt. V']
Ratio Decidendi
Special leave to appeal refused because the magistrate was positively satisfied, on the material before him, that the publishing was not justified within the meaning of s. 180, rendering investigation of material sufficiency unnecessary.
Court Disposition
special leave refused
Orders
- ['Special leave refused']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment