PQ Systems Europe Ltd & Anor v Aughton & Anor [2023] EWHC 581 (Pat) (22 March 2023)

PQ Systems Europe Ltd & Anor v Aughton & Anor [2023] EWHC 581 (Pat) (22 March 2023)

ProSPC was written by Mr Aughton in the course of his employment, making PQ the owner of copyright and confidential information. Mr Aughton copied at least a substantial part of ProSPC when writing InSPC v1, as evidenced by striking similarities in code structure and naming conventions, and circumstantial evidence including his retention and deletion of source code. The court drew adverse inferences from Mr Aughton's conduct regarding deletion of source code. InSPC v2 was found to be indirectly copied from ProSPC via InSPC v1, based on similarities in functionality and circumstantial evidence, even though direct code comparison was not possible due to language differences.

Citation
[2023] EWHC 581 (Pat)
Parties
Claimant: PQ Systems Europe Ltd; Claimant: Productivity-Quality Systems, Inc.; Defendant: Jeff Aughton; Defendant: Factoria Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 March 2023
Procedural Posture
Intellectual Property/copyright Infringement / Trial Judgment on Liability
Outcome
Judgment for the claimants on liability.
Legal Topics
Copyright in Computer Software, Breach of Confidence, Ownership of Employee Created Works, Software Code Copying, Confidential Information in Employment
Intellectual Property Employment Law Copyright in Computer Software Breach of Confidence Ownership of Employee Created Works Software Code Copying Confidential Information in Employment

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PQ Systems Europe Ltd

Claimant

Productivity-Quality Systems, Inc.

Claimant

Jeff Aughton

Defendant

Factoria Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Intellectual Property/copyright Infringement / Trial Judgment on Liability

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether copyright and confidential information in ProSPC are owned by PQ
  2. 2 Whether InSPC v1 was copied from ProSPC, infringing copyright or misusing confidential information
  3. 3 Whether InSPC v2 was copied from ProSPC, directly or indirectly

Ratio Decidendi

ProSPC was written by Mr Aughton in the course of his employment, making PQ the owner of copyright and confidential information. Mr Aughton copied at least a substantial part of ProSPC when writing InSPC v1, as evidenced by striking similarities in code structure and naming conventions, and circumstantial evidence including his retention and deletion of source code. The court drew adverse inferences from Mr Aughton's conduct regarding deletion of source code. InSPC v2 was found to be indirectly copied from ProSPC via InSPC v1, based on similarities in functionality and circumstantial evidence, even though direct code comparison was not possible due to language differences.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the claimants on liability.

Orders

  • Declaration that PQ owns the copyright and confidential information in ProSPC.
  • Declaration that Mr Aughton and Factoria infringed PQ's copyright and misused confidential information in creating InSPC v1 and v2.