Sheeran & Ors v Chokri & Ors

Sheeran & Ors v Chokri & Ors

The Claimants' response of 'not entitled' was not a sufficient or complete response to the Part 18 Request and was a breach of the 27 April Order. However, considering all the circumstances, including the nature of the Request and the lack of prejudice to the Defendants, the court granted the Claimants an extension of time to apply to set aside the order and extended the time for compliance to the date of disclosure, without imposing an unless order.

Parties
Claimant: Mr Edward Christopher Sheeran MBE; Claimant: Mr Steven McCutcheon; Claimant: Mr John McDaid; Claimant: Sony/ATV Music Publishing (UK) Limited; Claimant: Rokstone Music Limited; Claimant: Spirit B Unique JV SARL; Claimant: Kobalt Music Copyrights SARL; Defendant: Mr Sami Chokri; Defendant: Mr Ross O’Donoghue; Defendant: Artists and Company Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 October 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Intellectual Property / Costs and Case Management Conference; Application for Compliance With Part 18 Request
Outcome
Application granted in part; extension of time to apply to set aside the 27 April Order and extension of time for compliance with the Request to the date of disclosure.
Legal Topics
Part 18 Requests, Case Management, Disclosure, Copyright Infringement
Civil Procedure Intellectual Property Part 18 Requests Case Management Disclosure Copyright Infringement

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Edward Christopher Sheeran MBE

Claimant

Mr Steven McCutcheon

Claimant

Mr John McDaid

Claimant

Sony/ATV Music Publishing (UK) Limited

Claimant

Rokstone Music Limited

Claimant

Spirit B Unique JV SARL

Claimant

Kobalt Music Copyrights SARL

Claimant

Mr Sami Chokri

Defendant

Mr Ross O’Donoghue

Defendant

Artists and Company Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Intellectual Property / Costs and Case Management Conference; Application for Compliance With Part 18 Request

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Claimants' response 'not entitled' to the Defendants' Part 18 Request complied with a court order
  2. 2 Whether the Claimants should be granted an extension of time to apply to set aside or vary the order
  3. 3 Whether an unless order or other sanction should be imposed for non-compliance

Ratio Decidendi

The Claimants' response of 'not entitled' was not a sufficient or complete response to the Part 18 Request and was a breach of the 27 April Order. However, considering all the circumstances, including the nature of the Request and the lack of prejudice to the Defendants, the court granted the Claimants an extension of time to apply to set aside the order and extended the time for compliance to the date of disclosure, without imposing an unless order.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part; extension of time to apply to set aside the 27 April Order and extension of time for compliance with the Request to the date of disclosure.

Orders

  • Claimants granted 7 days from hand down of judgment to apply to set aside the 27 April Order.
  • Time for compliance with the Part 18 Request extended to the date for disclosure.