YPG IP LIMITED AND ANOR V YELLOWBOOK.COM.AU PTY LTD AND ORS HC AK CIV-2007-404-2839
Court declined to order the defendants' broad requests to dissect the plaintiffs' claimed works or to require naming of individual authors or wholesale discovery; held plaintiffs may claim copyright in the works as a whole and need not particularise component authorial contributions at interlocutory stage; ordered limited further particulars (Schedule 3 items 1,2,3(a),6–9), ordered answers to specified interrogatories (Schedule 4 items 1–9(a) and 10–16), ordered further discovery only of Schedule 1 items 2 and 4, and left inspection terms and certain matters for agreement or further submissions.
- Citation
- openlaw-4ea751cc_5807_4d3c_97ab_d235942d25b8.pdf
- Parties
- First Plaintiff: YPG IP Limited; Second Plaintiff: Yellow Pages Group Limited; First Defendant: Yellowbook.com.au Pty Ltd; Second Defendant: David Khoury; Third Defendant: Robert G Coles
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 31 May 2010
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Intellectual Property (copyright, Trade Marks, Fair Trading) / Interlocutory Applications (discovery, Particulars, Interrogatories, Inspection)
- Outcome
- Defendants' interlocutory application partly granted in limited respects and otherwise dismissed; plaintiffs to provide limited particulars, answer specified interrogatories, provide limited further discovery; inspection terms reserved; costs provisionally for plaintiffs
- Legal Topics
- Originality, Subsistence of Copyright, Compilations, Authorship and Ownership, Discovery and Inspection, Particulars and Interrogatories, Computer‑generated Works, Confidentiality, Costs
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
YPG IP Limited
First Plaintiff
Yellow Pages Group Limited
Second Plaintiff
Yellowbook.com.au Pty Ltd
First Defendant
David Khoury
Second Defendant
Robert G Coles
Third Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Intellectual Property (copyright, Trade Marks, Fair Trading) / Interlocutory Applications (discovery, Particulars, Interrogatories, Inspection)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether copyright subsists in the plaintiffs' Yellow Pages compilations and databases
- 2 Whether plaintiffs must particularise authorial contributions and identify individual authors
- 3 Whether defendants are entitled to broad discovery and interrogation about creation, automation and contributors to the works
Ratio Decidendi
Court declined to order the defendants' broad requests to dissect the plaintiffs' claimed works or to require naming of individual authors or wholesale discovery; held plaintiffs may claim copyright in the works as a whole and need not particularise component authorial contributions at interlocutory stage; ordered limited further particulars (Schedule 3 items 1,2,3(a),6–9), ordered answers to specified interrogatories (Schedule 4 items 1–9(a) and 10–16), ordered further discovery only of Schedule 1 items 2 and 4, and left inspection terms and certain matters for agreement or further submissions.
Court Disposition
Defendants' interlocutory application partly granted in limited respects and otherwise dismissed; plaintiffs to provide limited particulars, answer specified interrogatories, provide limited further discovery; inspection terms reserved; costs provisionally for plaintiffs
Orders
- Second plaintiff to provide further particulars in Schedule 3 items 1,2,3(a) and 6–9 inclusive
- Second plaintiff to answer interrogatories in Schedule 4 items 1–9(a) and 10–16 inclusive
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment