Appleton and Another v Harnischfeger Corporation and Another (495/92) [1994] ZASCA 141; 1995 (2) SA 247 (AD); [1995] 2 All SA 693 (A) (30 September 1994)

Appleton and Another v Harnischfeger Corporation and Another (495/92) [1994] ZASCA 141; 1995 (2) SA 247 (AD); [1995] 2 All SA 693 (A) (30 September 1994)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the subsistence of copyright in the engineering drawings in question must be determined by reference to the Copyright Act 98 of 1978 and Notice 125 of 1990, which extended protection to American works without qualification. The repealed subordinate legislation, including Proclamation 118 of 1924, no longer governs the recognition of foreign works. The respondents were not required to prove compliance with United States law or formalities. The Court found that the drawings were original artistic works, as they were created by employees of Harnischfeger Corporation with sufficient skill and were not slavish copies of earlier works. The appellants'...

Citation
[1994] ZASCA 141
Parties
Appellant: John Appleton; Appellant: Bedford Mechanical and Pump Spares CC; Respondent: Harnischfeger Corporation; Respondent: Harnischfeger (SA) Proprietary Limited
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
30 September 1994
Case Number
495/92
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Witwatersrand Local Division
Outcome
Appeal partially upheld; paragraph 2 of the order of the court a quo deleted; amendment to substitute drawing number 4J84 for 4J139 granted; remainder of the order, including the interdict, confirmed.
Judges
Corbett, Van Heerden, Nestadt, Harms, Nicholas
Legal Topics
Copyright Infringement, Originality Requirement, Subsistence of Copyright, Foreign Works Protection, Berne Convention, Statutory Interpretation

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 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Appleton

Appellant

Bedford Mechanical and Pump Spares CC

Appellant

Harnischfeger Corporation

Respondent

Harnischfeger (SA) Proprietary Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Witwatersrand Local Division

  1. 1 Whether copyright subsists in two engineering drawings created in the United States and whether the appellants infringed such copyright.
  2. 2 Whether the South African recognition of copyright in American works is governed by repealed subordinate legislation or by the current Copyright Act and ministerial notices.
  3. 3 Whether the drawings in question are original artistic works for the purposes of copyright protection.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the subsistence of copyright in the engineering drawings in question must be determined by reference to the Copyright Act 98 of 1978 and Notice 125 of 1990, which extended protection to American works without qualification. The repealed subordinate legislation, including Proclamation 118 of 1924, no longer governs the recognition of foreign works. The respondents were not required to prove compliance with United States law or formalities. The Court found that the drawings were original artistic works, as they were created by employees of Harnischfeger Corporation with sufficient skill and were not slavish copies of earlier works. The appellants'...

Court Disposition

Appeal partially upheld; paragraph 2 of the order of the court a quo deleted; amendment to substitute drawing number 4J84 for 4J139 granted; remainder of the order, including the interdict, confirmed.

Orders

  • The application by respondents to amend the notice of motion by substituting the number '4J84' for '4J139' is granted.
  • The appeal against paragraph 2 of the order of the court a quo is allowed and paragraph 2 is deleted.