Fay Evans v John Lewis PLC & Anor

Fay Evans v John Lewis PLC & Anor

The Claimant failed to prove, on the balance of probabilities, that any of the Defendants or their creative teams had access to her book before the creation and launch of the 2019 Advert and Excitable Edgar. The similarities identified were either present in the Defendants’ 2016 Outline, were commonplace, or insufficient to raise a presumption of copying. Without access, there can be no copyright infringement.

Parties
Claimant: Fay Evans; First Defendant: John Lewis PLC; Second Defendant: DBB UK Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 April 2023
Procedural Posture
Copyright Infringement / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim dismissed; Counterclaim allowed
Legal Topics
Copyright Infringement, Originality, Access, Substantial Part, Declaration of Non Infringement, Publicity Order
Intellectual Property Copyright Law Copyright Infringement Originality Access Substantial Part Declaration of Non Infringement Publicity Order

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fay Evans

Claimant

John Lewis PLC

First Defendant

DBB UK Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Copyright Infringement / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Defendants copied elements of the Claimant’s book 'Fred the Fire-sneezing Dragon' in the 2019 John Lewis Christmas Advert and the book 'Excitable Edgar'
  2. 2 Whether the similarities between the works amount to copyright infringement
  3. 3 Whether the Defendants had access to the Claimant’s work prior to creation of the 2019 Advert and Excitable Edgar

Ratio Decidendi

The Claimant failed to prove, on the balance of probabilities, that any of the Defendants or their creative teams had access to her book before the creation and launch of the 2019 Advert and Excitable Edgar. The similarities identified were either present in the Defendants’ 2016 Outline, were commonplace, or insufficient to raise a presumption of copying. Without access, there can be no copyright infringement.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; Counterclaim allowed

Orders

  • Declaration of non-infringement in favour of the Defendants
  • Order requiring the Claimant to publicise the judgment and order on her website and social media for at least six months