Declaration
80.Given my finding above, the application for summary judgment on the Counterclaim for a declaration is also rejected. The Claimant has real prospects of establishing that the WaterRower is a work of artistic craftsmanship.
- David Stone (sitting as Deputy High Court Judge) :
- The Application
- The Law on Strike Out/Summary Judgment
- On the other hand it is not uncommon for an application under Pt 24 to give rise to a short point of law or construction and, if the court is satisfied that it has before it all the evidence necessary for the proper determination of the question and that the parties have had an adequate opportunity to address it in argument, it should grasp the nettle and decide it. The reason is quite simple: if the respondent’s case is bad in law, he will in truth have no real prospect of succeeding on his claim or successfully defending the claim against him, as the case may be. Similarly, if the applicant’s case is bad in law, the sooner that is determined, the better
- However, it is not enough simply to argue that the case should be allowed to go to trial because something may turn up which would have a bearing on the question of construction
- Background
- The Defendant’s Strike Out Case
- United Kingdom Law on Works of Artistic Craftsmanship
- The whole conception of artistic craftsmanship appears to me to be to produce things which are both useful and artistic in the belief that being artistic does not make them any less useful.
- EU Copyright Law
- Declaration
- Conclusion