Credico Marketing Limited & Anor. v Benjamin Gregory Lambert & Anor.
[2023] EWCA Civ 262
Lunak Heavy Industries (UK) Ltd & Anor v Tyburn Film Productions Limited
9 September 2024
[2024] EWHC 2312 (Ch)
High Court
A movie used a dead actor's likeness without permission, and someone is suing the movie company for unjust enrichment. A judge decided that even though it's a long shot, the lawsuit isn't so crazy it should be dismissed now, so the case will go to trial.
Key Facts
- •Appeal against Master Kaye's order refusing to summarily dismiss or strike out a claim for unjust enrichment against Lunak Heavy Industries (UK) Ltd and Lucasfilm Ltd LLC.
- •Claim relates to the use of special effects to recreate Peter Cushing as Grand Moff Tarkin in 'Rogue One: A Star Wars Story'.
- •Claimant, Tyburn Film Productions Limited, alleges breach of a letter agreement with Cushing preventing the reproduction of his likeness without consent.
- •Appellants argue the unjust enrichment claim is unarguable, lacking enrichment at the Claimant's expense and a successful bona fide purchaser defence.
- •The dispute centers on whether the enrichment of the Appellants was 'at the expense of' the Claimant, given the contractual relationships between multiple parties.
Legal Principles
Summary judgment should only be granted if the court is certain the claim is bound to fail.
Richards (t/a Colin Richards & Co) v Hughes [2004] EWCA Civ 266; Barrett v Enfield London Borough Council [2001] 2 AC 550
Unjust enrichment is a category of rights, requiring enrichment at the claimant's expense and unjust enrichment.
None explicitly cited, but discussed in the judgment
The 'at the expense of' requirement in unjust enrichment claims requires a sufficient causal connection between the claimant's loss and the defendant's enrichment.
Investment Trust Companies v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2017] UKSC 29
A bona fide purchaser for value without notice defence is available, but notice can be actual or constructive.
Lipkin Gorman v Karpnale Ltd [1991] 2 AC 548
In areas of developing law, summary judgment is generally inappropriate; decisions should be based on actual facts found at trial.
Barrett v Enfield LBC [2001] 2 AC 550; Vedanta Resources v Lungowe [2019] UKSC 20
Outcomes
Appeal dismissed.
While the court was not persuaded the Claimant would succeed, it found the claim was not unarguable to the standard required for summary judgment or strike-out. The court highlighted the complexities of unjust enrichment claims, especially in three-party or indirect benefit scenarios, and the underdeveloped state of the law in this area. The defence of bona fide purchaser was also deemed to require further factual investigation.
Similar Cases
Banner Universal Motion Pictures Limited v Wiggin LLP & Anor
[2024] EWHC 656 (Ch)
Eva Green v White Lantern Film (Britannica) Ltd & Anor.
[2023] EWHC 930 (Ch)
Noel Redding Estate Ltd & Anor v Sony Music Entertainment UK Limited
[2024] EWHC 561 (Ch)
IMG Data Limited v Perform Content Services Limited
[2023] EWHC 3244 (Ch)