NEWS

Ron Englehart Pty Ltd v Enterprise Constructions (Aust) Pty Ltd: copyrights in building design

The Full Court of the Federal Court in Ron Englehart Pty Ltd v Enterprise Constructions (Aust) Pty Ltd [2012] FCAFC4 had to deal with the following issue: was copyright in a building design infringed?

To establish that there was an infringement, a copyright owner needs to establish that:

  1. The alleged copied work has a sufficient degree of objective similarity with the alleged copyright work; and
  2. The alleged copied work was created through a direct or indirect copying of the copyright work.

Importantly, that copying does not have to be intentional.

Ron Englehart Pty Ltd (“Ron Englehart”) alleged that:

  1. Enterprise Constructions (Aust) Pty Ltd (“Enterprise”) building design was substantially similar to Ron Englehart’s building design;
  2. Because of the similarity, the Court should infer that the director of Enterprise had a brochure that contained the Ron Englehart design and used it to instruct the architect as to what to draw; and
  3. The architect unintentionally copied Ron Englehart’s building design.

The Court accepted there were striking similarities between the copyright work and the alleged copied work, however, the Court held that Ron Englehart failed to establish that the similarities were as a result of copying.

The following are some of the key considerations the Court took into account in making that finding:

  1. There was no evidence that the director of Enterprise ever obtained the relevant brochure;
  2. The architect’s initial design was not similar to Ron Englehart’s design;
  3. While the architect’s design was later amended to become similar to Ron Englehart’s design, the Court accepted the architect’s evidence that he made the changes on his own initiative and without reference to Ron Englehart’s design; and
  4. All experts agree that Enterprise’s design could have been done without copying.

This case highlights that mere similarity is insufficient for a copyright owner to establish an infringement, even in the case of striking similarity. The copyright owner needs to also establish, through direct evidence, that the copyright design was copied.

This case also highlights that copyright subsists in building design.

Related News

Doyles Guide Leading Class Action Lawyers, Australia 2026

William Roberts are proud to announce that  Bill Petrovski and Ding Pan have been selected as Leading Class Actions Lawyers – Australia, 2026. The 2026

Read More

Lessons from Bremner v French (No 6) [2026] NSWSC 826

Please, Your Honour, May I Have Some More (of my fees)? – Lessons from Bremner v French (No 6) [2026] NSWSC 826 Justice Parker’s decision

Read More

Zamagias v Saltalamacchia [2026] NSWCA 48: A Lesson on the Value of Contemporaneous Evidence

In a decision handed down by the New South Wales Court of Appeal on 2 April 2026, Justice Adamson with President Ward and Justice Free

Read More

Get in touch

Contact our team today

William Roberts Lawyers

Sydney

Level 22
66 Goulburn Street
SYDNEY NSW 2000

PO Box 20424, World Square NSW 2000

Melbourne

Level 7,

171 La Trobe Street
MELBOURNE VIC 3000

 

PO Box 13171, Law Courts VIC 8010

Brisbane

Level 9
193 North Quay
BRISBANE QLD 4000

 

PO Box 12170, George Street QLD 4003

Singapore

Level 19
Singapore Land Tower
50 Raffles Place
SINGAPORE 048623