| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
© Crown Copyright
NAVITAIRE INC v EASYJET AIRLINE CO LTD (NO.2)
(Pumfrey J.): January 11–14 and March 11, 20051
[2005] EWHC 0282 (Ch); [2006] R.P.C. 4
Practice—Jurisdiction of trial judge after judgment but before order perfected—Power to make findings which should have been made in judgment, to hear further evidence, to reconsider or reverse judgment already given—Opportunity afforded by draft judgments for parties' advisers to satisfy themselves that the court had produced the required findings.
Evidence—Whether to admit fresh evidence after trial—Application of Ladd v Marshall criteria—Whether approach might be more flexible than in Court of Appeal—Whether hearsay statement admissible if maker not available for cross-examination—Whether reasonable diligence exercised.
Copyright—Airline booking system—Computer software—Databases—Infringement—Extent of restricted acts defined by United Kingdom legislation no narrower in effect than explicitly stated in Software Directive—Copyright licence—Breach of contract—Whether anything done was "necessary" for access to and use of database—Whether legitimate to communicate information concerning database to third party—Whether second defendant jointly liable—Whether to grant injunction or damages—Injunction discretionary remedy not to be granted if result oppressive—Costs—Leave to appeal.
Key Words: Admissibility • Copyright • Evidence taken after trial • Fresh evidence • Hearsay evidence • Reopening cases • Software
1 Paragraph numbers in this judgment are as assigned by the court.