Cases

Fisher v Brooker & Onward Music (CA)

Held

Allowing the appeal (David Richards J dissenting):

(1) B and OM were not denied their right to a fair trial as a result of the long delay. Delay alone was insufficient to raise any defence. The court was not entitled to interfere with the judge’s decision on proprietary estoppel. There were no grounds for disturbing the judge’s findings of fact on authorship; he was right to grant a declaration as to F’s co-authorship. However, by virtue of F’s acquiescence and laches, the judge ought not to have granted him any declaration as to co-ownership or revocation of B and OM’s implied licence.

(2) In light of (1) it was unnecessary to express a view, although such a licence was not difficult to imply and made commercial sense.

(3) In light of (1) it was unnecessary to express a view, although the contract may have prevented F from revoking the implied licence to exploit the work.

(4) In light of (1) no useful purpose would be served by a decision on this point.

Also