Ogunkoya v Harding
Decision date: 10 March 2017
Neutral citation: [2017] EWHC 470 (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 case concerned a claim that the defendant's 2016 book copied a substantial part of three draft chapters of an unfinished manuscript sold by the claimant in 2010. The judge found no copyright infringement and no breach of confidence, concluding the similarities were largely explicable by the parties' use of the same public historical sources and that no enforceable obligation of confidence had been imposed. The claimant's account was disbelieved on key factual points and the claim was dismissed.
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 judge's core ratio is that substantial similarity alone is not sufficient; where two works rely on the same public historical sources, similar expressions and facts may be independently derived and do not prove copying of a substantial part of a claimant's manuscript. Further, the existence of a copyright notice and a small-sale distribution of draft chapters does not automatically impose a confidential obligation on recipients or render the material confidential for purposes of a breach of confidence claim.
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 judge observed that extensive research and collation of public-domain historical facts does not convert those facts into proprietary content protectable as confidential merely because they are assembled by a claimant. He also noted that small verbal coincidences, absent stronger evidence of copying, may reasonably be treated as coincidence where common sources exist.