Croacia / Casos nacionales
Scientific handbook — originality assessment depends on the proved work
Casos nacionales. La inclusión en esta ficha no convierte una referencia extranjera en una decisión nacional. Se conserva el estado y el alcance de la fuente.
Expediente y fuentes
- Nombre
- Scientific handbook — originality assessment depends on the proved work
- Cita
- Supreme Court of the Republic of Croatia, Revd-2924/2021-2, ECLI:HR:VSRH:2021:7098, 3 November 2021
- record kind
- judicial_decision
- Tribunal
- Supreme Court of the Republic of Croatia
- Instancia
- national supreme court, leave-to-revise stage
- Fechas
- Decisión
- 2021-11-03
- first instance
- 2019-06-13
- Recurso
- 2021-04-08
- Estado
- final inadmissibility order; leave to revise refused
- Resultado
- Leave application rejected as inadmissible; the appellate judgment remained operative.
- Resumen
- No. Whether a particular handbook qualifies depends on the circumstances of that work, and the appellate court had given clear, non-contradictory reasons applying the law to the facts.
- Antecedentes
- A claimant asserted copyright in a scientific handbook. The appellate court treated it as an original intellectual creation with individual character; it was undisputed that the defendant had named her as author in earlier editions.
- Historia procesal
- The Zagreb Commercial Court decided P-1201/2016-65 on 13 June 2019. The High Commercial Court partly affirmed and partly varied in Pž-4688/2019-3 on 8 April 2021. The defendant sought leave to revise; the Supreme Court rejected the application as inadmissible.
- Cuestión jurídica
- Was the proposed general originality question suitable for Supreme Court intervention to secure uniform application of law?
- Criterio
- No. Whether a particular handbook qualifies depends on the circumstances of that work, and the appellate court had given clear, non-contradictory reasons applying the law to the facts.
- Fundamento decisivo
- A differently situated prior decision did not establish conflict. The application challenged fact-sensitive evaluation rather than raising a qualifying general legal question.
- Límites
- Not a merits judgment adopting a new originality test, and the lower judgments were not independently reconstructed in full here. Not an AI case.
- Relevancia
- doctrina-general
- Referencias relacionadas
- Peso del precedente
- Limited; useful only to show that originality must be assessed against proved facts and that this order did not create a universal rule. Integración/votación: Three-judge panel; no dissent or vote breakdown published, so unanimity is not asserted.
- Fuente
- Referencia
- Scientific handbook — originality assessment depends on the proved work
- Enlace
- Consultar fuente
- Autoridad
- Supreme Court of the Republic of Croatia
- Tipo
- primary_judicial_full_text_cross_checked_reproduction
- Tipo de evidencia
- primary_judicial_full_text_cross_checked_reproduction
- Método de comprobación
- Exact full-text reproduction read and cross-checked against official decision identifier; official court host temporarily unresolved during second-review fetch.
- Localizador
- paras. 1 and 3-6, especially para. 4
- Verificación documentada
- Sí