Wilson v Australian Copyright Council

[2001] FCA 1918

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Wilson v Australian Copyright Council [2001] FCA 1918

PAUL WILSON V AUSTRALIAN COPYRIGHT COUNCIL

N392 of 2001

WILCOX, WEINBERG and HELY JJ
13 AUGUST 2001
SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	N 392 OF 2001

BETWEEN:	PAUL WILSON APPLICANT
AND:	AUSTRALIAN COPYRIGHT COUNCIL RESPONDENT
JUDGE:	WILCOX, WEINBERG and HELY JJ
DATE OF ORDER:	13 AUGUST 2001
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The appeal be dismissed.

2.The appellant pay the costs of the respondent.

Note:    Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	N 392 OF 2001

BETWEEN:	PAUL WILSON APPLICANT
AND:	AUSTRALIAN COPYRIGHT COUNCIL RESPONDENT

JUDGE:	WILCOX, WEINBERG and HELY JJ
DATE:	13 AUGUST 2001
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

THE COURT:

1. The Court received extensive written submissions from the appellant before today and we have had the opportunity of considering those.  We have also had the benefit of extensive oral development of his position by Mr Wilson.  During the course of his oral submissions, in particular, Mr Wilson referred to a number of aspects of the conduct of the trial and notwithstanding the matters that he raised, we are not satisfied that there was any unfairness in the way in which this trial was conducted. 

2. In relation to the substantive merit of the matter, it is unnecessary for us to deal with that at any length.  The merits are crystallised in paragraph 48 of his Honour's reasons for judgment, to which reference was made during the course of the argument.  On those findings it was inevitable that his Honour would come to the conclusion that there had been no infringement of copyright and dismiss the application.  No error has been shown in regard to those findings, consequently, his Honour was correct in dismissing the application and it follows that the appeal should be dismissed.

3. The order of the Court will be that the appeal was dismissed with costs.

I certify that the preceding three (3) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Court.

Associate:

Dated:             29 April 2002

Applicant appeared in person
Counsel for the Respondent:	M Green
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Minter Ellison
Date of Hearing:	13 August 2001