Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
High Court, in a claim by an airline alleging unlawful 'screen scraping' by the operator of a website: (a) refuses to strike out the defendant's counterclaim, notwithstanding that the competition law allegations were inconsistent with the denials in the defence, on the grounds that it was open to the defendants to put the airline on proof of the complex matters pleaded; and (b) refuses to direct a modular trial, on the grounds that the plaintiff had put forward a wide variety of claims, and that the competition law aspect could not readily to separated out from all of the other issues.
Claim by airline against operators of web site - access to 'price, flight and time' (PFT) data from airline's website - sale of airline's products on defendant's web site - counterclaim - allegation that airline was abusing a dominating position in the market place - competition - application to strike out counterclaim - whether position taken by defendant in counterclaim negates denial in defence - application for modular trial - agreement made in 2011 - access to PFT data for purposes of comparison only - whether 'screen scraping' activity was in breach of terms of licence - use of PFT data for purposes other than price comparison - website terms of use - earlier determination - locus standi to pursue counterclaim in light of denials in defence - jurisdiction to strike out claim or part of claim.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
The only e-mail alert service for all Irish judgments over the past 13 years. Click here to request a subscription.
Register Now