Moviebox Megastores International Limited & Ors. v Mohammad Akram Rahi & Ors.

Moviebox Megastores International Limited & Ors. v Mohammad Akram Rahi & Ors.

The court found that Mr Rahi did not author the majority of the disputed songs and knowingly made fraudulent and malicious copyright claims to YouTube, resulting in the suspension and removal of the claimants' YouTube channels and content. The court found that Mr Rahi fabricated evidence, provided dishonest testimony, and acted in concert with Ms Manzoor and Mr Qureshi to injure the claimants' economic interests by unlawful means. The claimants proved their claims for malicious falsehood, unlawful means conspiracy, and are entitled to injunctive relief. Quantum of damages is to be determined at a later hearing.

Parties
Claimant: Moviebox Megastores International Limited; Claimant: Oriental Star Agencies Limited; Claimant: Moviebox (Birmingham) Limited; Defendant: Mohammad Akram Rahi; Defendant: Shazia Manzoor; Defendant: Azeem Ud Din Qureshi
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 March 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil (consolidated Claims) / Trial of Preliminary Issues (liability Only)
Outcome
Judgment for the claimants on liability. Damages to be assessed at a later hearing.
Legal Topics
Copyright Infringement, Malicious Falsehood, Unlawful Means Conspiracy, Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Economic Torts, Injunctions
Intellectual Property Tort Commercial Law Copyright Infringement Malicious Falsehood Unlawful Means Conspiracy Fraudulent Misrepresentation Economic Torts +1 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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Moviebox Megastores International Limited

Claimant

Oriental Star Agencies Limited

Claimant

Moviebox (Birmingham) Limited

Claimant

Mohammad Akram Rahi

Defendant

Shazia Manzoor

Defendant

Azeem Ud Din Qureshi

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (consolidated Claims) / Trial of Preliminary Issues (liability Only)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr Rahi was the author of the disputed songs forming the basis of copyright claims
  2. 2 Whether Mr Rahi's complaints to YouTube were malicious and/or fraudulent
  3. 3 Whether Mr Rahi's actions interfered with the claimants' economic interests by unlawful means

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that Mr Rahi did not author the majority of the disputed songs and knowingly made fraudulent and malicious copyright claims to YouTube, resulting in the suspension and removal of the claimants' YouTube channels and content. The court found that Mr Rahi fabricated evidence, provided dishonest testimony, and acted in concert with Ms Manzoor and Mr Qureshi to injure the claimants' economic interests by unlawful means. The claimants proved their claims for malicious falsehood, unlawful means conspiracy, and are entitled to injunctive relief. Quantum of damages is to be determined at a later hearing.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the claimants on liability. Damages to be assessed at a later hearing.

Orders

  • Permanent injunctions granted against Mr Rahi in the terms sought in Claim 72, Claim 92, and Claim 115, restraining him from issuing or encouraging copyright strikes against the claimants' YouTube channels.
  • Declaration that Mr Rahi's copyright claims to YouTube regarding the disputed songs were fraudulent and malicious.