Bergh and Others v Agricultural Research Council (93/2019) [2020] ZASCA 30; [2020] 2 All SA 637 (SCA); 2020 BIP 455 (SCA); [2020] HIPR 119 (SCA) (1 April 2020)
The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the ARC failed to discharge the onus of proving ownership of copyright in the BeefPro computer program. The evidence established that Tim Pauw, acting independently and without remuneration or supervision, developed BeefPro under an oral agreement with the ARC, which expressly reserved copyright to Pauw and his corporate vehicle, BenguelaSoft. The ARC did not exercise the requisite control over the making of BeefPro to be considered its author under the Copyright Act. Draft agreements and correspondence confirmed that BenguelaSoft was to retain copyright and receive the majority of licence fees. The ARC’s reliance on s 5(2) of the Copyright Act was...
- Citation
- [2020] ZASCA 30
- Parties
- Appellant: Leslie Bergh; Appellant: Bull’s Eye Consulting; Appellant: BenguelaSoft; Appellant: Tim Pauw; Appellant: Naomi Havenga; Respondent: The Agricultural Research Council
- Court
- Supreme Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 1 April 2020
- Case Number
- 93/2019
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Appeal From Western Cape Division of the High Court, Cape Town
- Outcome
- Appeal upheld; order of the court below set aside and substituted with dismissal of the application with costs, including costs of two counsel.
- Judges
- Navsa, Wallis, Van der Merwe, Schippers, Mojapelo
- Legal Topics
- Copyright in Computer Programs, Authorship and Ownership, Commissioned Works, Unlawful Competition, Statutory Interpretation, Administration of Justice
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Leslie Bergh
Appellant
Bull’s Eye Consulting
Appellant
BenguelaSoft
Appellant
Tim Pauw
Appellant
Naomi Havenga
Appellant
The Agricultural Research Council
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Western Cape Division of the High Court, Cape Town
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Agricultural Research Council (ARC) proved ownership of copyright in the BeefPro computer program.
- 2 Whether the ARC exercised sufficient control over the making of BeefPro to be considered its author under the Copyright Act.
- 3 Whether the ARC’s claim based on s 5(2) of the Copyright Act, regarding works made under the direction or control of the state, applies to BeefPro.
Ratio Decidendi
The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the ARC failed to discharge the onus of proving ownership of copyright in the BeefPro computer program. The evidence established that Tim Pauw, acting independently and without remuneration or supervision, developed BeefPro under an oral agreement with the ARC, which expressly reserved copyright to Pauw and his corporate vehicle, BenguelaSoft. The ARC did not exercise the requisite control over the making of BeefPro to be considered its author under the Copyright Act. Draft agreements and correspondence confirmed that BenguelaSoft was to retain copyright and receive the majority of licence fees. The ARC’s reliance on s 5(2) of the Copyright Act was...
Court Disposition
Appeal upheld; order of the court below set aside and substituted with dismissal of the application with costs, including costs of two counsel.
Orders
- The appeal is upheld with costs, including the costs of two counsel.
- The order of the court below is set aside and substituted as follows: 'The application is dismissed with costs, including the costs of two counsel.'
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