Ukoumunne v The University of Birmingham & Ors
Decision date: 5 February 2020
Neutral citation: [2020] EWHC 184 (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
This was a multi-claim case by an unrepresented PhD candidate alleging that the University of Birmingham, four academics and a publisher used substantial parts of her draft thesis in three articles and a book. The court struck out the copyright claim as having no real prospect of success, struck or stayed the breach of confidence claim against the publisher as devoid of merit (with a stay on condition it be bound by any findings against other defendants), and gave the claimant a final unless-order to particularise confidential material against the 1st–4th Defendants (failing which those confidence and related claims will be struck out). Contract claims were struck out as to Defendants 2–5 but the University’s contract claim may proceed if properly particularised; negligence, discrimination and loss of earnings claims were struck out for lack of particularity/real prospect.
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: high
The court applied standard principles that copyright protects expression, not ideas, and requires proof of copying of the author’s expression or a substantial part (including original selection or arrangement), not merely similar themes or use of common sources; and that a breach of confidence claim requires identifiable confidential information of the necessary quality, circumstances importing an obligation of confidence or notice to the recipient, and unauthorised use causing detriment. On strike-out/summary disposal the correct test is whether the claimant has a realistic (not fanciful) prospect of success, with an opportunity to remedy pleadings unless improvement is unlikely.
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 (obiter) that commonplace structural arrangements (eg chronological chaptering) are unlikely to be protectable as original selection/arrangement, and that merely informing a publisher of a general plagiarism complaint and supplying an entire thesis without specifying confidential elements is unlikely to put the publisher on sufficient notice to impose a duty of confidence. The court also commented that procedural allowances should be made for litigants in person, but that such allowances do not require permitting hopeless claims to proceed.