This article is from the Australian Property Journal archive
PORTER Davis Homes has won a long running legal fight against Dennis Family Homes for knocking off its house designs.
The latest victory follows Porter Davis’ win against Metricon Homes and Carlisle Homes three years ago over, where the Court found they have copied Porter Davis’ house designs.
Porter Davis launched Federal Court action against Dennis Family in 2005 alleging that it had infringed the copyright in Porter Davis’ original house design known as the Seattle and its later generation version of the design, the Memphis.
Almost six years later, Justice Dodds-Streeton has found Dennis Family copied seven designs which were sold extensively. The Dennis Family’ house plans — the Grange 291, Grange 322, Thornton 310, Esperance, Flinders 270, Flinders 290 and Flinders 310 were found to have infringed copyright in the Porter Davis houses and plans by copying the “alfresco quadrant” feature of those designs.
Justice Dodds-Streeton also found that the key Dennis Family witnesses, who denied reference to or copying the Porter Davis’ design and asserted an alternative account of creation of the designs, were evasive, unreliable and defensive and rejected their evidence.
Porter Davis managing director Anthony Roberts said the company has proven that these top builders have copied its designs, which it has invested a lot of money and time in developing to appeal to home buyers.
“This decision, which comes after a long and expensive battle that started almost six years ago, reinforces that Porter Davis will take action to protect its original designs.
“This decision, like the previous decisions in the cases against Metricon Homes and Carlisle Homes, is especially relevant to architects, designers, draftsmen, builders and others in the building industry. The industry should remain aware of the legal consequences of having had reference to other builder’s plans and designs,” he added.
Porter Davis also claimed that four additional Dennis Family Homes’ designs (being the Flinders 301, Flinders 331, Flinders 361 and Lancaster 281) infringe copyright in the Seattle design. These houses continue to be offered for sale by Dennis Family.
Roberts said the company does not know the precise number of houses which have been built by its competitors, found to have copied its Seattle and Memphis house designs, but he believes it to be in the thousands.
“These claims, as well as the damages to which Porter Davis is entitled, will now be determined by the Court.
“Porter Davis Homes will seek from Dennis Family Homes either an award of damages or an account of profits (being the profits it has earned as a result of each individual house it has built and sold according to the seven Dennis Family Homes designs), as well as its costs and interest,” he continued.
Three years ago, the Court found Metricon copied the Seattle design, and the conduct of those involved, was found to have been “deliberate” and “conscious” and the Court found that Metricon had “a corporate culture which accepted the copying of competitors’ designs”.
In the Carlisle Homes case, the directors of Carlisle Homes were found by the Court to have given “consciously untrue evidence” and “colluded in doing so”. Carlisle Homes was found to have deliberately copied the alfresco quadrant because it was commercially successful, and to have invented a false account of creation of their house design.
Law firm Middletons acted for Porter Davis, partner Tony Watson said the case yet again confirms that copyright infringement proceedings focus on how a person created their design and whether they had reference to another’s work and whether in creating their design they have reproduced a substantial part of the other person’s work.
“Sometimes proceedings in Australian Courts take a long time and can be expensive, however often the true story of the creation of a copyright work is not revealed until all the documents have been carefully scrutinised and the witnesses have been extensively cross examined at trial and the full history has been pieced together.
“We are very pleased for Porter Davis as it has yet again defended the originality of its innovative designs and sent a further warning to competitors not to copy its original designs or action will be taken,” Watson concluded.
Australian Property Journal
