Photobooth Props Limited and Lily's Prints Limited vs NEPBH Ltd and others

This case involved a dispute over the sale of a photobooth business and associated copyright infringement claims.

TLDR:

• Claimants sued Defendants for breach of contract and copyright infringement.
• Defendants failed to attend the trial, causing significant difficulties.
• The court found in favor of the Claimants, awarding damages and costs.

The First Claimant, Photobooth Props Limited, and the Second Claimant, Lily's Prints Limited, brought a claim against NEPBH Ltd and other associated defendants. The dispute arose from a business transaction in 2019 where the Claimants alleged that the Defendants misrepresented the sale of a photobooth business and continued to infringe on the associated copyrights.

The Defendants, including Michael Quinn and his family members, were accused of failing to comply with court orders and not providing necessary evidence or attending the trial. This non-compliance led the court to proceed in their absence, as permitted under CPR 39.3.

The Claimants argued that the Defendants had sold them the entirety of a photobooth business, including all assets and intellectual property, but continued to compete with them and infringe on the transferred copyrights. The Defendants, however, claimed that only certain assets were sold, not the entire business.

The court reviewed the evidence, including contemporaneous communications and agreements between the parties. It found that the Defendants had indeed misrepresented the scope of the sale and continued to infringe on the copyrights owned by the Claimants.

The court concluded that the Defendants were liable for breach of contract and copyright infringement. It awarded damages to the Claimants and ordered an inquiry into the quantum of damages. The court also granted the Claimants' request to apply for the IPEC costs cap to be disapplied due to the Defendants' exceptionally poor behavior.

This case highlights the importance of compliance with court orders and the potential consequences of failing to attend trial. It also underscores the need for clear and comprehensive agreements in business transactions to avoid disputes over the scope and ownership of transferred assets.

Legal representatives: The Claimants appeared through their officer Mr. Paul Sherrington. The Defendants were not present.

Judicial Panel: Ms. Pat Treacy (Sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge in the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court)

Case Citation Reference: [2023] EWHC 3478 (IPEC)