Universal Studios International BV v Flextech Rights Ltd

Universal Studios International BV v Flextech Rights Ltd

The Court held that 'content' in clause 4(a) includes all aspects of the episodes, and that compliance with the ITC Code is relevant evidence of content but not determinative. The comparison is between each episode of the later series and the general run of episodes of the 1997/1998 series. Rider 8 does not preclude alleging breach of clause 4(a) for untransmissible episodes and does not permit a repeat to substitute for an original episode. The trial judge must determine on the full evidence whether there was sufficient dissimilarity to justify dissolution under Dutch law.

Parties
Appellant: Universal Studios International BV; Respondent: Flextech Rights Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 July 2006
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (commercial) / Appeal From High Court Preliminary Issues Determination
Outcome
Appeal dismissed in substance; High Court judgment largely upheld, subject to clarification that final determination of breach and right to dissolve is for trial judge on full evidence.
Legal Topics
Interpretation of Commercial Contracts, Remedies for Breach of Contract, Application of Foreign Law (dutch Law), Television Broadcasting Rights, Compliance With Regulatory Codes
Contract Law Commercial Law Interpretation of Commercial Contracts Remedies for Breach of Contract Application of Foreign Law (dutch Law) Television Broadcasting Rights Compliance With Regulatory Codes

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Universal Studios International BV

Appellant

Flextech Rights Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (commercial) / Appeal From High Court Preliminary Issues Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Proper construction of 'similar in content' in clause 4(a) of the 1998 Agreement under Dutch law
  2. 2 Whether non-compliance with the ITC Code is relevant to similarity of content
  3. 3 Whether Rider 8 precludes alleging that untransmissible episodes breach clause 4(a)

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that 'content' in clause 4(a) includes all aspects of the episodes, and that compliance with the ITC Code is relevant evidence of content but not determinative. The comparison is between each episode of the later series and the general run of episodes of the 1997/1998 series. Rider 8 does not preclude alleging breach of clause 4(a) for untransmissible episodes and does not permit a repeat to substitute for an original episode. The trial judge must determine on the full evidence whether there was sufficient dissimilarity to justify dissolution under Dutch law.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed in substance; High Court judgment largely upheld, subject to clarification that final determination of breach and right to dissolve is for trial judge on full evidence.

Orders

  • The 1998 Agreement is to be construed in accordance with the judgment of Cooke J, subject to variations resulting from this judgment.
  • The issues of breach and right to dissolve are to be determined at trial on the full evidence.