Al-Hasani v Nettler & Ors

Al-Hasani v Nettler & Ors

The claim for copyright infringement is time-barred under the Limitation Act 1980. The claimant has no real prospect of establishing deliberate concealment or that he could not with reasonable diligence have discovered the alleged infringement more than 6 years before issuing proceedings. The particulars of claim are defective, incoherent, and fail to disclose reasonable grounds. Permission to amend is refused and the claim is struck out in its entirety.

Parties
Claimant: Nadim Al-Hasani; First Defendant: Ronald Nettler; Second Defendant: The Chancellor, Masters and Scholars of the University of Oxford
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 March 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil (copyright Infringement) / Ruling on Multiple Interlocutory Applications Including Strike Out, Summary Judgment, and Permission to Amend
Outcome
Claim struck out in its entirety; permission to amend refused; summary judgment for defendants; costs order varied to no order as to costs for one application.
Legal Topics
Copyright Infringement, Limitation of Actions, Civil Procedure—strike Out, Summary Judgment, Amendment of Pleadings
Intellectual Property Civil Procedure Copyright Infringement Limitation of Actions Civil Procedure—strike Out Summary Judgment Amendment of Pleadings

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

Parties

Nadim Al-Hasani

Claimant

Ronald Nettler

First Defendant

The Chancellor, Masters and Scholars of the University of Oxford

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (copyright Infringement) / Ruling on Multiple Interlocutory Applications Including Strike Out, Summary Judgment, and Permission to Amend

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim for copyright infringement is time-barred under the Limitation Act 1980
  2. 2 Whether the particulars of claim disclose reasonable grounds or are an abuse of process
  3. 3 Whether permission to amend the particulars of claim should be granted

Ratio Decidendi

The claim for copyright infringement is time-barred under the Limitation Act 1980. The claimant has no real prospect of establishing deliberate concealment or that he could not with reasonable diligence have discovered the alleged infringement more than 6 years before issuing proceedings. The particulars of claim are defective, incoherent, and fail to disclose reasonable grounds. Permission to amend is refused and the claim is struck out in its entirety.

Court Disposition

Claim struck out in its entirety; permission to amend refused; summary judgment for defendants; costs order varied to no order as to costs for one application.

Orders

  • Existing particulars of claim struck out
  • Permission to amend particulars of claim refused