Nouveau Fabrics Ltd. v Voyage Decoration Ltd. & Anor [2004] EWHC 895 (Ch) (28 April 2004)

Nouveau Fabrics Ltd. v Voyage Decoration Ltd. & Anor [2004] EWHC 895 (Ch) (28 April 2004)

The court found that the Pineapple design was original and that the Luxor motif and fabric were sufficiently similar to infer copying. The defendants failed to rebut this inference with credible evidence of independent creation. The copying was of a substantial part of the original work. The defendants had reason to believe the copies were infringing after being put on notice by the claimant's letter and after a reasonable period for evaluation, making them liable for secondary infringement under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

Citation
[2004] EWHC 895 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Nouveau Fabrics Limited; First Defendant: Voyage Decoration Limited; Second Defendant: Dunelm Soft Furnishings Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 April 2004
Procedural Posture
Copyright Infringement Claim (chancery Division) / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim allowed
Legal Topics
Copyright Infringement, Artistic Works, Originality, Secondary Infringement, Substantial Part Copying, Knowledge or Reason to Believe (infringement)
Intellectual Property Law Copyright Infringement Artistic Works Originality Secondary Infringement Substantial Part Copying Knowledge or Reason to Believe (infringement)

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nouveau Fabrics Limited

Claimant

Voyage Decoration Limited

First Defendant

Dunelm Soft Furnishings Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Copyright Infringement Claim (chancery Division) / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Luxor motif and fabric is a copy of the Pineapple motif and cloth or a substantial part thereof
  2. 2 Whether the defendants knew or had reason to believe that the copies were infringing
  3. 3 Whether the works in question are original artistic works under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Pineapple design was original and that the Luxor motif and fabric were sufficiently similar to infer copying. The defendants failed to rebut this inference with credible evidence of independent creation. The copying was of a substantial part of the original work. The defendants had reason to believe the copies were infringing after being put on notice by the claimant's letter and after a reasonable period for evaluation, making them liable for secondary infringement under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed

Orders

  • Declaration of copyright infringement against both defendants
  • Injunction restraining further infringement