Andrew Tipping v Mark Smith
Decision date: 22 July 2026
Neutral citation: [2026] EWHC 1855 (IPEC)
Overall AI summary confidence: high
Short overview
This short overview is intended to summarise the case, issues and outcome so far as they are supported by the judgment.
AI confidence in this short overview: high
The Claimant owned copyright in photographs published in Max Power; the Defendant admitted reposting them in 1,432 social‑media posts. The IPEC held the use would be treated as commercial in a hypothetical licence negotiation, fixed a reasonable notional licence at £37.50 per post and awarded damages of £56,850, interest of £19,741.67 and costs of £58,075 (total £134,666.67). The court rejected the Defendant's arguments that the use was non‑commercial or permitted by alleged royalty‑free licences.
Ratio decidendi
This summary is intended to identify the ratio decidendi, meaning the legal reasons for deciding and the binding part of the decision.
AI confidence in this ratio decidendi summary: medium
Where widely reposted magazine photographs are used on social media to build an audience that supports revenue‑generating activities, a hypothetical licence negotiation should treat the use as commercial; a notional per‑post licence fee can be a suitable market proxy, derivable by applying an appropriate proportion of an established photographer’s feature rate.
Obiter dicta
This summary is intended to identify obiter dicta, meaning observations made by the way that were not necessary to deciding the case and are not binding.
AI confidence in this obiter dicta summary: medium
The judgment observed that confirmation from a professional negotiating body (here the NUJ) can support the reasonableness of a market‑proxy licence rate, and that charging separately for use on two distinct social platforms may be justified where both platforms contributed value to the licensee’s aims.