One Picture Ltd v Craig

One Picture Ltd v Craig

The judge failed to expressly deal with Mr Craig's claim for recovery of expenditure in paragraph 16(c) of the amended counterclaim due to reliance on the wrong version of the pleading; this issue must be remitted for determination. Mr Craig is entitled to interest on the sums awarded on the counterclaim from the date of the original counterclaim (14 October 2002).

Parties
Claimant/respondent: One Picture Ltd; Defendant/appellant: Timothy Craig
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 May 2004
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Copyright Ownership, Trade Mark Infringement, Passing Off, Partnership Disputes, Counterclaim Procedure, Quantum Meruit, Proprietary Estoppel, Interest on Judgment Debts
Intellectual Property Contract Law Civil Procedure Copyright Ownership Trade Mark Infringement Passing Off Partnership Disputes Counterclaim Procedure +3 more

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

One Picture Ltd

Claimant/respondent

Timothy Craig

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court judge erred in failing to address the claim for recovery of expenditure incurred by Mr Craig on behalf of the business (counterclaim paragraph 16(c))
  2. 2 Whether Mr Craig was entitled to interest on sums awarded on the counterclaim
  3. 3 Whether the judge applied the correct version of the counterclaim

Ratio Decidendi

The judge failed to expressly deal with Mr Craig's claim for recovery of expenditure in paragraph 16(c) of the amended counterclaim due to reliance on the wrong version of the pleading; this issue must be remitted for determination. Mr Craig is entitled to interest on the sums awarded on the counterclaim from the date of the original counterclaim (14 October 2002).

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Remission to the High Court judge for determination of the claim in paragraph 16(c) of the amended counterclaim (recovery of expenditure incurred by Mr Craig on behalf of the business)
  • Interest to be awarded on the counterclaim sums from 14 October 2002 at a rate to be fixed by the judge