Nine Films & Television Pty Ltd v Ninox Television Limited [2005] FCA 249

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Nine Films & Television Pty Ltd v Ninox Television Limited [2005] FCA 249

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – motion by second respondent to be removed as a party to the proceedings – applicants seek declaration that production and broadcast of "The Block" did not infringe the respondents' copyright in "Dream Home" – TVNZ is a proper party to the proceedings – TVNZ should be a party when all the relevant issues have been canvassed and a final order is made – declarations of right should not be made by consent - no undue hardship for TVNZ to remain as a party whereas more difficult for applicants to obtain documents if TVNZ is removed – no abuse of process – TVNZ excused from further attendance if it wishes

Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) s 202 Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) s 52 Federal Court Rules O 6 r9, O 9 r 7,O 20 r 2

International General Electric Co of New York Ltd v Commissioner of Customs and Excise [1962] Ch 784 Davlon Pty Ltd v Ku-ring-gai Municipal Council (1968) 3 NSWR 638 Prior v Sheldon (2000) 48 IPR 301 General Steels Industries Inc v Commissioner for Railways (NSW) (1964) 112 CLR 125

P W Young, Declaratory Orders, Butterworths, Sydney, 1984 E P Skone James et al., Copinger and Skone James on Copyright, 13th edn, Sweet & Maxwell,London, 1991 NINE FILMS & TELEVISION PTY LTD AND NINE NETWORK AUSTRALIA PTY LTD v NINOX TELEVISION LIMITED (formerly known as NINOX FILMS LIMITED), TELEVISION NEW ZEALAND LIMITED AND JOHN CHARLES McEWEN NSD 1820 OF 2004 TAMBERLIN J SYDNEY 16 MARCH 2005

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NSD 1820 OF 2004

BETWEEN: NINE FILMS & TELEVISION PTY LTD (ACN 066 040 024)

FIRST APPLICANT

NINE NETWORK AUSTRALIA PTY LTD (ACN 008 685 407)

SECOND APPLICANT

AND: NINOX TELEVISION LIMITED