British Horseracing Board Ltd & Ors v William Hill Organization Ltd [2001] EWCA Civ 1268 (31 July 2001)

British Horseracing Board Ltd & Ors v William Hill Organization Ltd [2001] EWCA Civ 1268 (31 July 2001)

The Court of Appeal held that the issues of interpretation of the Directive were not acte clair and required reference to the European Court of Justice. The court found that the judge was entitled to conclude that William Hill used information derived from the BHB database and that the acts constituted extraction and reutilisation under the Directive, but final determination was deferred pending the ECJ's interpretation.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 1268
Parties
Respondents: British Horseracing Board Ltd., The Jockey Club, Weatherbys Group Ltd.; Appellant: William Hill Organization Ltd.
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 July 2001
Procedural Posture
Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) / Court of Appeal (civil Division) Judgment With Reference to European Court of Justice Pending
Outcome
Reference to the European Court of Justice; injunction discharged pending final determination; further hearing to settle reference questions.
Legal Topics
Database Right, Copyright, Sui Generis Right, Directive 96/9/ec, Infringement, Extraction and Reutilisation, Injunctions
Intellectual Property European Union Law Database Right Copyright Sui Generis Right Directive 96/9/ec Infringement Extraction and Reutilisation +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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 14
Sign in to unlock

Parties

British Horseracing Board Ltd., The Jockey Club, Weatherbys Group Ltd.

Respondents

William Hill Organization Ltd.

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) / Court of Appeal (civil Division) Judgment With Reference to European Court of Justice Pending

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether William Hill infringed the database right of BHB under Directive 96/9/EC by extracting or reutilising substantial or insubstantial parts of the database without licence
  2. 2 Whether the information used by William Hill was proved to derive from the BHB database
  3. 3 Interpretation of 'extraction', 'reutilisation', 'substantial part', and 'database-ness' under the Directive

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that the issues of interpretation of the Directive were not acte clair and required reference to the European Court of Justice. The court found that the judge was entitled to conclude that William Hill used information derived from the BHB database and that the acts constituted extraction and reutilisation under the Directive, but final determination was deferred pending the ECJ's interpretation.

Court Disposition

Reference to the European Court of Justice; injunction discharged pending final determination; further hearing to settle reference questions.

Orders

  • Reference of questions to the European Court of Justice to be settled by counsel and approved by the court.
  • Discharge of the permanent injunction against William Hill pending ECJ determination.