The plaintiff sought certification of a proposed class action alleging copyright infringement against a legal publisher that reproduced lawyers’ court documents within an electronic research database without express permission.
The defendants argued the claim conflicted with the open court principle, lacked common issues, and would be unmanageable due to questions of originality, authorship, client participation, and solicitor‑client privilege.
The court held that the certification threshold is procedural and low under the Class Proceedings Act, 1992, and that several systemic questions about the defendant’s conduct and defences, including fair dealing, implied consent, and public policy, were capable of common resolution.
Although issues such as authorship, ownership, and damages would require individual determinations, the court concluded these did not preclude certification.
The proposed class was narrowed to lawyers and paralegals in private practice, and the action was certified with modified common issues.
