Sui generis meaning

IDDQD Ltd v Codeberry & Smith, Royal Mail Group Ltd v Codeberry & Smith [2025] EWHC 2561 (Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? Rulings on database right infringement are infrequent, so this judgment offers valuable direction for practitioners in this field. It matters especially to digital enterprises working with extensive datasets sourced from third parties. The court confirmed that the sui generis database right in the Copyright and Rights in Databases Regulations 1997 (CRD 1997) safeguards significant investment in collecting, checking and arranging information. Early-stage companies cannot depend on indirect or ‘open data’ sources where those datasets embed protected content. The judgment also clarifies that employing licensed material to ‘cleanse’, ‘validate’ or ‘update’ one’s own dataset still amounts to extraction or re-utilisation when substantial elements of another database are carried across. The court further touched on artificial intelligence (AI): the judge examined the boundary of merely ‘consulting’ a database that will not infringe, concluding that simple viewing is not an infringement, but the line is crossed...

‘CV-Online Latvia’ SIA v ‘Melons’ SIA Case C-762/19 What are the practical implications of this case? Across the EU, when a website or online database provides a search tool that automatically draws into its results information sourced from third-party databases, this will typically infringe database right. There can, however, be circumstances where the practice is lawful if it can be shown that using data from those third-party databases does not prejudice the maker’s investment—for instance, where the data is deployed in a wholly unrelated market that the maker neither foresaw nor competes in. Nonetheless, in most situations it will be necessary to obtain permission from the maker of any third-party databases employed to produce an aggregated search result. What was the background? A jobs website (Melons) offered a search engine that queried several websites hosting job advertisements. It compiled hyperlinks from all of these sources (in particular CV-Online)...

In this issue: When planning permission is needed Compulsory purchase Planning applications and decisions Biodiversity Planning appeals Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content When planning permission is needed Court confirms serviced apartments are sui generis use comprising a single planning unit (Empire Communications Ltd v SSHCLG) In Empire Communications Ltd v SSHCLG [2026] EWHC 817 (Admin), the Planning Court dismissed an appeal against an inspector’s decision to uphold an enforcement notice. The inspector’s expert planning judgement was exercised in finding the properties were in sui generis use as short‑stay serviced apartments rather than Use Class C3 dwellinghouses. That conclusion flowed from an assessment of the overall character of use, taking into account matters such as the apartment layouts, shared facilities, how the premises were marketed, and the services provided for guests. The inspector rightly determined that the properties operated as a single planning unit, not as separate dwellinghouses, so the ten‑year immunity period...

This Practice Note explores whether music compilations can attract copyright as databases. At its core, the enquiry is whether the compilation’s contents reflect the author’s own intellectual creation (explained in more detail below). Copyright subsistence in a database (often termed database copyright) is separate from the sui generis database right, which is also addressed in this Practice Note. The sui generis database right concerns legal protection for databases of any kind and stems from the Copyright and Rights in Databases Regulations 1997 (CRD 1997), SI 1997/3032. Whether a sui generis database right exists does not settle if copyright also subsists in the same database, and vice versa. A database may benefit from one, both, or neither right. Court of Justice judgments This Practice Note cites rulings of the Court of Justice. For guidance on whether decisions of the Court of Justice bind UK courts, see Practice Note: Assimilated law—Assimilated case law. Categorisation of copyright works Copyright is the exclusive right to do, and to authorise others...

Change of use and development under the TCPA 1990 For the purposes of section 55 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (TCPA 1990), any material alteration in the use of buildings or other land is treated as “development”. As development requires planning permission, it is therefore always necessary to assess whether a proposed change of use is material and so amounts to development. However, TCPA 1990, s 55(2)(f) states that no development occurs, and permission is not needed, where the existing and proposed uses both fall within the same class specified in an order made under that paragraph. For instance, switching from a post office to a hairdresser would not need planning permission, as each sits within class A1 (shops). That said, physical works to the premises to enable the new use may still call for planning permission. The Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987, SI 1987/764 (the Use Classes Order), made pursuant to TCPA 1990, s 55(2)(f), categorises the uses of land and buildings...

Databases For many years, databases—particularly electronic ones—have been a significant component of digital economies across the globe. Numerous jurisdictions view investing in and leveraging databases as essential to fostering an information market. In the UK, the principal legislation concerning IP protection for databases comprises: the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (CDPA 1988) the Copyright and Rights in Databases Regulations 1997 (CRD 1997), SI 1997/3032, which gave effect to Directive 96/9/EC on the legal protection of databases (EU Database Directive) in the UK (now assimilated law, see: Databases and assimilated EU law, below) A database can receive protection in a range of ways: copyright can shield literary and artistic works, including tables and compilations forming part of a database, provided they are original works...

Case No. [ insert number ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS OF ENGLAND & WALES INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LIST (ChD) [ INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ENTERPRISE COURT ] BETWEEN: [ insert full name of claimant ] Claimant and [ insert full name of defendant ] Defendant DEFENCE Unless stated otherwise in this Defence: references to paragraph numbers are to those in the Particulars of Claim; defined expressions carry the meanings given in the Particulars of Claim, without admission; and save where expressly admitted or not admitted below, the Defendant denies each allegation in the Particulars of Claim. Any matter not specifically addressed herein is required to be strictly proved. Any document mentioned in this Defence is to be read at trial for its full terms, sense and effect. The Claimant and Claimant’s Database The averments at paragraph...