Tangle Inc v One For Fun Limited & Ors

Tangle Inc v One For Fun Limited & Ors

The pleadings and evidence do not disclose any real prospect of success against the Third and Fourth Defendants for joint tortfeasance, as there is no allegation of involvement beyond their roles as directors. The case against the Second Defendant, while weak, just crosses the threshold due to allegations and limited evidence of his control and operation of the First Defendant, and thus should not be struck out but stayed to the quantum hearing by consent.

Parties
Claimant: Tangle Inc; First Defendant: One For Fun Limited; Second Defendant: David Jonathan Mordecai; Third Defendant: Mark Edward Colley; Fourth Defendant: Joanna Elizabeth Burton
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 February 2023
Procedural Posture
Intellectual Property Copyright Infringement / Application to Strike Out Claim Against Individual Defendants (directors)
Outcome
Claim against Third and Fourth Defendants struck out; claim against Second Defendant not struck out but stayed to quantum hearing by consent.
Legal Topics
Copyright Infringement, Joint Tortfeasance, Directors' Liability
Intellectual Property Law Copyright Infringement Joint Tortfeasance Directors' Liability

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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tangle Inc

Claimant

One For Fun Limited

First Defendant

David Jonathan Mordecai

Second Defendant

Mark Edward Colley

Third Defendant

Joanna Elizabeth Burton

Fourth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Intellectual Property Copyright Infringement / Application to Strike Out Claim Against Individual Defendants (directors)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pleadings disclose a real prospect of success against the Second, Third, and Fourth Defendants for joint tortfeasance in copyright infringement

Ratio Decidendi

The pleadings and evidence do not disclose any real prospect of success against the Third and Fourth Defendants for joint tortfeasance, as there is no allegation of involvement beyond their roles as directors. The case against the Second Defendant, while weak, just crosses the threshold due to allegations and limited evidence of his control and operation of the First Defendant, and thus should not be struck out but stayed to the quantum hearing by consent.

Court Disposition

Claim against Third and Fourth Defendants struck out; claim against Second Defendant not struck out but stayed to quantum hearing by consent.

Orders

  • Claim against Mark Edward Colley (Third Defendant) struck out.
  • Claim against Joanna Elizabeth Burton (Fourth Defendant) struck out.