The Legal 500

HANOVER HOUSE, 14 HANOVER SQUARE, LONDON, W1S 1HP, ENGLAND
Tel:
Work 020 7667 5000
Fax:
Fax 020 7667 5100
DX:
44617 MAYFAIR
Web:
www.harbottle.com
Email:

Abigail Jane Payne

Tel:
Work +44 20 7667 5000
Email:
Harbottle & Lewis LLP

Work Department

Film and TV

Position

Partner in the film and TV department providing advice on all aspects of development, finance, production and distribution of feature films and television programmes and exploitation of ancillary rights. Particular expertise is in advising film funds, EIS schemes and structuring international co-productions and providing advice on tax incentives and international subsidies for a wide international client base of producers, distributors, broadcasters, exhibitors, agents, insurance companies and artists.

Career

Trained Theodore Goddard; qualified 1995; business affairs executive BBC (Drama) 1995-97; film and TV group Harbottle & Lewis 1997-2003; partner 2002.

Languages

French, German.

Member

BAFTA; New Producers Alliance; Women in Film & Television.

Education

Bath University (BA European Studies with French and German Hons); Nottingham Trent University (CPE; LSF).

Leisure

Polo, tennis, skiing, yoga.

Practice Areas

Film, TV, theatre, music; Intellectual property; Project finance (including PFI)

Back to index

Legal Developments by:
Harbottle & Lewis LLP

  • Account of profits v damages: when and why does it matter?

    Since 2007, Experience Hendrix LLC(Hendrix) and Times Newspapers Ltd (Times) have been litigating over the intellectual property rights (IPR) in a recording of a Jimi Hendrix concert that took place at the Royal Albert Hall in February 1969. In September 2006 Times distributed a free CD, or covermount, with each edition of The Sunday Times . A claim was issued against Times in March 2007 for infringement of copyright and performers’ rights under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. In March 2008 the High Court held that Times had infringed the IPR in the recording and Hendrix elected to have an inquiry as to damages in respect of that infringement. The case has given rise to some complex issues as to the basis for the quantification of damages, and the inquiry is due to be heard next year, but the case is also a reminder of more general considerations in relation to remedies in IPR cases, and why the basis for quantification of those remedies can have far reaching consequences for a successful claimant.

    - Harbottle & Lewis LLP

Legal Developments worldwide

Legal Developments and updates from the leading lawyers in each jurisdiction. To contribute, send an email request to