SAS Institute Inc v World Programming Ltd

SAS Institute Inc v World Programming Ltd

The application was dismissed because there was no material change of circumstances or error justifying amendment under CPR 3.1(7), the application was delayed without justification, and the proposed amendments were unnecessary for the CJEU to address the issues. The proper remedy for SAS was to appeal, not to seek amendment at first instance.

Parties
Claimant: SAS Institute Inc.; Defendant: World Programming Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 November 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil / Ruling on Application to Amend Questions Referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Copyright in Computer Programs, Reference to Court of Justice of the European Union, Amendment of Reference Questions, Civil Procedure Rules (cpr) 3.1(7)
Intellectual Property Civil Procedure Copyright in Computer Programs Reference to Court of Justice of the European Union Amendment of Reference Questions Civil Procedure Rules (cpr) 3.1(7)

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 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SAS Institute Inc.

Claimant

World Programming Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Ruling on Application to Amend Questions Referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to amend questions referred to the CJEU after the order is sealed
  2. 2 Whether discretion should be exercised to allow amendment of reference questions
  3. 3 Whether delay and justification exist for amendment

Ratio Decidendi

The application was dismissed because there was no material change of circumstances or error justifying amendment under CPR 3.1(7), the application was delayed without justification, and the proposed amendments were unnecessary for the CJEU to address the issues. The proper remedy for SAS was to appeal, not to seek amendment at first instance.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • SAS's application to amend the questions referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union is dismissed.