Norowzian v Arks Ltd & Anor [1999] EWCA Civ 3018 (04 November 1999)

Norowzian v Arks Ltd & Anor [1999] EWCA Civ 3018 (04 November 1999)

A film can be a dramatic work for the purposes of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 if it is a work of action capable of being performed before an audience. However, in this case, the defendants' film did not copy a substantial part of the claimant's film, as similarities were only in style and technique,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1999] EWCA Civ 3018
Parties
Claimant: Mehdi Norowzian; First Defendant: Arks Ltd; Second Defendant: Guinness Brewing Worldwide Ltd; Third Defendant: Guinness Plc
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 November 1999
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Copyright Subsistence in Films, Definition of Dramatic Work, Substantial Copying, Originality in Copyright, Overlap Between Film and Dramatic Work
Intellectual Property Copyright Law Copyright Subsistence in Films Definition of Dramatic Work Substantial Copying Originality in Copyright Overlap Between Film and Dramatic Work

Source-derived case record

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mehdi Norowzian

Claimant

Arks Ltd

First Defendant

Guinness Brewing Worldwide Ltd

Second Defendant

Guinness Plc

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a film can be a 'dramatic work' under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988
  2. 2 Whether the defendants copied a substantial part of the claimant's film 'Joy'

Ratio Decidendi

A film can be a dramatic work for the purposes of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 if it is a work of action capable of being performed before an audience. However, in this case, the defendants' film did not copy a substantial part of the claimant's film, as similarities were only in style and technique, not in protected expression.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • As between the appellant and the first defendant, appeal dismissed with costs.
  • As between the appellant and the second and third defendants, appeal dismissed with costs up to and including 22nd January 1999; no costs to the second and third defendants being awarded thereafter.