Noah v Shuba [1991] FSR 14

• Consultant, Claimant, was employed by public health body. Whilst there he wrote ‘A Guide to Hygienic Skin Piercing’ at home in evenings and weekends. To do this, used employer’s library and assistance of secretary.

• Guide was first published by employer. Defendant wrote an article which reproduced substantial extracts from Claimant’s guide, and Claimant sued for breach of contract.

• Issue was whether Claimant was owner of copyright in guide.

Held

• Key question is whether Claimant’s employer could have forced Claimant to write the guide under contract of employment.

• On facts, Claimant’s employer could not have made Claimant do this.

• Therefore guide was not written “in course of employment”.

  • This despite Claimant making use of employer’s facilities.

• Even if Claimant had been acting in course of employment, would have been implied term to contrary so that copyright remained with Claimant.

  • This because Claimant’s employer had long-standing practice of letting copyright remain with its employees.