![Case Nos: IL-2023-000080 and IL-2024-000038 - [2025] EWHC 2561 (Ch)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_O3rEzCI.png){kind=logo}
Case Nos: IL-2023-000080 and IL-2024-000038 - [2025] EWHC 2561 (Ch)
Fecha: 10-Oct-2025
Heading
Royal Courts of Justice, Rolls Building
Fetter Lane, London, EC4A 1NL
Before :
HIS HONOUR JUDGE HACON
Between :
IDDQD LIMITED | Claimant |
- and - | |
(1) CODEBERRY LIMITED (2) LEE PAUL SMITH And Between ROYAL MAIL GROUP LIMITED - and - (1) CODEBERRY LIMITED (2) LEE PAUL SMITH | Defendants Claimant Defendants |
Chris Aikens and Mitchell Beebe (instructed by Pinsent Masons LLP) for the Claimant in Case No. IL-2023-000080
Jonathan Hill (instructed by Addleshaw Goddard LLP) for the Claimant in
Case No. IL-2024-000038
In both claims the Second Defendant appearing in person for the Defendants
Hearing dates: 2-4, 7-8 and 10-11 April 2025
Approved Judgment
This judgment was handed down remotely at 10.30am on 10 October 2025 by circulation to the parties or their representatives by e-mail and by release to the National Archives.
.............................
HIS HONOUR JUDGE HACON
- Heading
- Judge Hacon
- Interim appeals
- Representation
- The defendants’ skeleton arguments
- Applications during the trial
- The witnesses
- Database Right – the law
- Application of EU law
- Definition of database
- Subsistence
- Ownership
- Infringement
- Substantiality
- Extraction
- Re-utilisation
- Consultation
- Consent
- Regulation 19 of The Database Regulations
- EU law and estoppel, laches and acquiescence
- Copyright – the law
- Applicability of EU law
- Subsistence of copyright in a database
- Transitional provisions
- The consequence of amendments to a database
- Ownership of copyright
- Infringement of copyright
- Issuing copies to the public
- Communication to the public
- Making an adaptation
- Authorisation
- Use of the PAF by RMG
- The defendants’ case in summary
- RMG’s claim in summary
- Database Right
- The creation and maintenance of the GetAddress Database
- Consultation
- Whether the defendants had a licence granted by RMG
- The relevance of RMG’s End User Terms
- Whether RMG otherwise consented to use of the PAF
- Regulation 19 of the Database Regulations
- The Consumer Rights Act 2015
- Restraint of trade
- Copyright
- Subsistence and ownership
- Infringement
- Limitation
- Joint liability
- Additional damages
- IDDQD’s claim
- Database right
- The contracting party in the agreement with IDDQD
- Whether either RMG’s or IDDQD’s licence extended to Codeberry
- Whether the acts of the defendants were licensed under IDDQD’s terms
- Regulation 19 of The Database Regulations
- The Consumer Rights Act 2015
- Infringement of database right
- Joint liability
- Breach of contract
- Cause of action in respect of the RMG EUT
- Breach of the RMG EUT
- Clarity of the RMG EUT
- Restraint of trade
- Conclusions