Orvec International Ltd v Linfoots Ltd
Decision date: 18 June 2014
Neutral citation: [2014] EWHC 1970 (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
Orvec sued Linfoots claiming Linfoots had impliedly granted it an exclusive perpetual licence in photographs and that supplying images to Intex amounted to passing off. The judge found any implied licence was at most a simple non-exclusive licence (probably perpetual) and did not imply general exclusivity, and Orvec failed to establish passing off in respect of the images complained of. Accordingly Orvec's claims for breach of licence and passing off failed.
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: low
The court applied a restrictive approach to implying terms into a contract that expressly reserves copyright, preferring a minimal implication of a bare non-exclusive licence to use the photographs unless the contractual instrument and background circumstances require a broader or exclusive right. Exclusivity will not be implied merely because a claimant's trade mark or product is depicted in the photographs.
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 complex, detailed implied terms are less likely to be imposed than simple ones, and suggested that where a photograph includes the claimant's trade mark, the claimant's other trade mark rights may influence whether exclusivity in the photograph's copyright should be implied—but these comments were not essential to the decision on the facts.