BURDEN v PLANTATION GROWN TIMBERS (INTL) LTD [2016] NZHC 312

BURDEN v PLANTATION GROWN TIMBERS (INTL) LTD [2016] NZHC 312

The Court held that the defendants' industrial application plea was sufficiently pleaded if paragraph 23 was amended to specify the copyright works in paras 15, 29 and 32; plaintiffs must discover pleadings and the plaintiffs' briefs/cross-examination from the ESR proceeding insofar as they relate to subsistence and originality of the artistic works common to both proceedings (Toscana, Irish Coast, PGT Lifestyle Additions); defendants must amend their affidavit of documents to particularise the Miscellaneous category; the second counterclaim will not be struck out as it legitimately places the issue on the trial agenda; and a specific pre-trial timetable was directed to ensure readiness...

Citation
[2016] NZHC 312
Parties
First Plaintiff: Ian James Burden; Second Plaintiff: Plantation Grown Timbers (International) Limited; Third Plaintiff: Plantation Grown Timbers (Vietnam) Limited; First Defendant: Debonaire Furniture Limited; Second Defendant: Burden Furniture (International) Limited; Third Defendant: Burden Furniture Co Limited; Fourth Defendant: Lindsay John Burden; Fifth Defendant: Jeremy David Smith; Sixth Defendant: Robert Wayne Smith
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
29 February 2016
Procedural Posture
Civil Intellectual Property (copyright) Dispute / Pre Trial Case Management Conference (directions and Discovery Disputes)
Outcome
Court made case management orders and directed discovery, pleading amendments and a trial timetable.
Legal Topics
Industrial Application Exception, Particulars and Pleading, Discovery and Scope of Disclosure, Counterclaims and Relief, Interlocutory Procedure, Pre Trial Timetabling
Intellectual Property Copyright Civil Procedure Evidence Industrial Application Exception Particulars and Pleading Discovery and Scope of Disclosure Counterclaims and Relief +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ian James Burden

First Plaintiff

Plantation Grown Timbers (International) Limited

Second Plaintiff

Plantation Grown Timbers (Vietnam) Limited

Third Plaintiff

Debonaire Furniture Limited

First Defendant

Burden Furniture (International) Limited

Second Defendant

Burden Furniture Co Limited

Third Defendant

Lindsay John Burden

Fourth Defendant

Jeremy David Smith

Fifth Defendant

Robert Wayne Smith

Sixth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Intellectual Property (copyright) Dispute / Pre Trial Case Management Conference (directions and Discovery Disputes)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether defendants must provide further particulars of the industrial application plea under s 75 Copyright Act 1994
  2. 2 Whether plaintiffs must disclose documents relating to industrial application and the extent of discovery
  3. 3 Whether the defendants' second counterclaim under s 141 should be struck out or repleaded

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the defendants' industrial application plea was sufficiently pleaded if paragraph 23 was amended to specify the copyright works in paras 15, 29 and 32; plaintiffs must discover pleadings and the plaintiffs' briefs/cross-examination from the ESR proceeding insofar as they relate to subsistence and originality of the artistic works common to both proceedings (Toscana, Irish Coast, PGT Lifestyle Additions); defendants must amend their affidavit of documents to particularise the Miscellaneous category; the second counterclaim will not be struck out as it legitimately places the issue on the trial agenda; and a specific pre-trial timetable was directed to ensure readiness...

Court Disposition

Court made case management orders and directed discovery, pleading amendments and a trial timetable.

Orders

  • Amend paragraph 23 of the amended statement of defence to expressly refer to the copyright works in paragraphs 15, 29 and 32 as the works alleged to have been industrially applied more than 16 years before the alleged infringements
  • Plaintiffs to provide discovery of pleadings, briefs of evidence and cross-examination from Burden v ESR Group (NZ) Ltd insofar as they relate to the subsistence and originality of artistic works relied on in both proceedings (The Toscana Collection, The Irish Coast Collection, PGT Lifestyle Additions Collection)