SKY PLC; AND SKY UK LIMITED AGAINST ROBERT STEWART [2017] ScotCS CSOH_141 (03 November 2017)

SKY PLC; AND SKY UK LIMITED AGAINST ROBERT STEWART [2017] ScotCS CSOH_141 (03 November 2017)

The court found beyond reasonable doubt that the respondent, as designated premises manager, was responsible for the day-to-day running of the premises and had knowledge of the perpetual interdict. The evidence of two independent investigators established that the AFC Match was shown on Sky Sports in the premises on 25 September 2016, displaying Sky's copyrighted Works. The respondent had no commercial Sky subscription at the material time, and any arrangement with Scotsport did not authorize the broadcast of Sky content. The respondent failed to take reasonable steps to comply with the interdict and was in contempt of court.

Citation
[2017] ScotCS CSOH_141
Parties
Petitioner: Sky PLC; Petitioner: Sky UK Limited; Respondent: Robert Stewart
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
03 November 2017
Procedural Posture
Petition and Complaint for Breach of Interdict (contempt of Court) / Judgment After Proof (trial)
Outcome
Petition sustained; respondent found in contempt of court for breach of interdict.
Legal Topics
Copyright Infringement, Breach of Interdict, Contempt of Court, Licensing of Broadcasts, Agency and Responsibility of Premises Managers
Intellectual Property Civil Procedure Contempt of Court Copyright Infringement Breach of Interdict Licensing of Broadcasts Agency and Responsibility of Premises Managers

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sky PLC

Petitioner

Sky UK Limited

Petitioner

Robert Stewart

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Petition and Complaint for Breach of Interdict (contempt of Court) / Judgment After Proof (trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent breached a perpetual interdict by showing a Sky Sports broadcast in licensed premises without a commercial subscription
  2. 2 Whether service of the interdict was valid and respondent had knowledge of the order
  3. 3 Whether the respondent took reasonable steps to comply with the interdict

Ratio Decidendi

The court found beyond reasonable doubt that the respondent, as designated premises manager, was responsible for the day-to-day running of the premises and had knowledge of the perpetual interdict. The evidence of two independent investigators established that the AFC Match was shown on Sky Sports in the premises on 25 September 2016, displaying Sky's copyrighted Works. The respondent had no commercial Sky subscription at the material time, and any arrangement with Scotsport did not authorize the broadcast of Sky content. The respondent failed to take reasonable steps to comply with the interdict and was in contempt of court.

Court Disposition

Petition sustained; respondent found in contempt of court for breach of interdict.

Orders

  • Declaration that the respondent breached the perpetual interdict by showing the AFC Match on 25 September 2016 in the premises without a commercial Sky subscription.
  • Finding of contempt of court against the respondent.