Coles v Dormer (No 2)

Coles v Dormer (No 2) involved a dispute over copyright infringement, where the plaintiff, Coles, held the copyright to the plans of a house design. The defendants, Dormer, constructed a house that was substantially similar to the plaintiff’s design, leading to legal proceedings. The case came before the court to address the issue of damages for copyright infringement and whether additional damages under section 115(4) of the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) were applicable.

The primary legal issues that the court had to decide were whether the defendants were liable for copyright infringement and, if so, what the appropriate measure of damages should be. The court also needed to consider whether the infringement was flagrant enough to warrant additional damages under section 115(4). This section allows for additional damages where the infringement was done with reckless indifference to the plaintiff’s rights.

The court found that the defendants had indeed infringed the plaintiff’s copyright by replicating the house design without permission. The infringement was considered flagrant due to the defendants’ reckless disregard for the plaintiff’s copyright. The court ruled that the defendants were liable for copyright infringement and ordered them to pay damages to the plaintiff. The amount of damages was set at $70,000, reflecting the loss suffered by the plaintiff. The court further considered that the defendants had complied with earlier orders to remove publicly visible external elements of the infringing house, which was taken into account in the final assessment of damages.