IDDQD Ltd v Codeberry Ltd & Anor [2025] EWHC 2561 (Ch) (10 October 2025)

IDDQD Ltd v Codeberry Ltd & Anor [2025] EWHC 2561 (Ch) (10 October 2025)

The defendants infringed the claimants' database right and copyright by extracting and re-utilising substantial parts of the PAF and GBR Database without licence or consent. The defendants' use was not mere consultation and constituted appropriation of protected investment and skill. No implied or express consent was established. Limitation and other defences failed on the facts and law.

Citation
[2025] EWHC 2561 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: IDDQD Limited; Claimant: Royal Mail Group Limited; Defendant: Codeberry Limited; Defendant: Lee Paul Smith
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 October 2025
Procedural Posture
Intellectual Property Database and Copyright Infringement / High Court Trial Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for the claimants
Legal Topics
Database Right, Copyright, Infringement, Consent, Substantiality, Ownership, EU Law, Limitation, Anti Competitive Behaviour
Intellectual Property Competition Law Database Right Copyright Infringement Consent Substantiality Ownership +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 5 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

IDDQD Limited

Claimant

Royal Mail Group Limited

Claimant

Codeberry Limited

Defendant

Lee Paul Smith

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Intellectual Property Database and Copyright Infringement / High Court Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants infringed database right and/or copyright in the PAF and GBR Database
  2. 2 Whether the defendants acted in breach of licence terms
  3. 3 Whether the defendants' use constituted extraction or re-utilisation of a substantial part of the databases

Ratio Decidendi

The defendants infringed the claimants' database right and copyright by extracting and re-utilising substantial parts of the PAF and GBR Database without licence or consent. The defendants' use was not mere consultation and constituted appropriation of protected investment and skill. No implied or express consent was established. Limitation and other defences failed on the facts and law.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the claimants

Orders

  • Defendants to cease infringing acts in relation to the PAF and GBR Database
  • Defendants to pay damages or account of profits to claimants (quantum to be determined)