Jia Wang

The appellant software company appealed the dismissal of its claim that the respondent breached a distribution agreement by copying the features and functionality of its software to create a derivative work.

The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge's factual findings that no copying occurred and that the respondent's use of a marketing presentation was authorized.

The Court also found no error in the trial judge's evidentiary rulings, including the exclusion of an omnibus package of documents under the party admissions exception to the hearsay rule and the exclusion of an expert report that lacked necessity.

The appeal was dismissed.

The plaintiff and a defendant mortgagee brought a motion for summary judgment and distribution of sale proceeds paid into court following the sale of two properties by power of sale.

The court found that the defendant owners had engaged in fraudulent conduct, including registering sham mortgages and fraudulently discharging a valid mortgage, to defeat creditors.

The court granted summary judgment, reinstated the fraudulently discharged mortgage, and ordered the distribution of the sale proceeds to the valid mortgagees, including their legal costs on a complete indemnity basis.

The plaintiffs in a proposed class action brought an ex parte motion for an extension of time to serve their Statement of Claim.

The extension was sought to allow the plaintiffs to secure after-the-event insurance or third-party funding.

The court noted that the defendants ought to have been given notice of the motion, as it was in aid of obtaining litigation support.

However, pursuant to Rule 37.07(5)(c), the court granted the extension subject to the condition that the motion record, the order, and the reasons for decision be served on the defendants.