Pearce v Ove Arup Partnership Ltd & others
Language: English Series: All England Law Reports ; [1997] 3 All ER 31-44(14)Publication details: 1997Subject(s): Summary: ChD 7 March 1997. In 1986 P created drawings as part of a diploma exercise. The action was against O, a firm of UK civil engineers, and three other parties from Holland, who together formed the planning and design team for a dutch building built between 1990 and 1993. P claimed that his plans had been reproduced in this construction. The dutch defendants applied to strike out the claim on grounds that a breach of foreign copyright was not justiciable in English courts. P contended that it was justiciable under law covered by the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982. "Held" that whilst jurisdiction was allowed, the action would be struck out against all defendants as an abuse of process - the evidence being purely speculative.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS57376 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 79589-1001 |
ChD 7 March 1997. In 1986 P created drawings as part of a diploma exercise. The action was against O, a firm of UK civil engineers, and three other parties from Holland, who together formed the planning and design team for a dutch building built between 1990 and 1993. P claimed that his plans had been reproduced in this construction. The dutch defendants applied to strike out the claim on grounds that a breach of foreign copyright was not justiciable in English courts. P contended that it was justiciable under law covered by the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982. "Held" that whilst jurisdiction was allowed, the action would be struck out against all defendants as an abuse of process - the evidence being purely speculative.