A British corporation ("WBDL") entered into a distribution agreement with a California corporation ("WBI") pursuant to which WBI was granted the right to license and to exhibit and distribute the picture, largely in Canada and the U.S., but with WBDL retaining control of the master negative. WBDL was found not to be "leasing" the film to WBI because it did not provide "exclusive possession at a rent for a term" (see p. 243).
Topics and taglines
Tagline
no "lease" where failure to provide exclusive possession
Words and phrases
d7 import status
Drupal 7 entity type
Node
Drupal 7 entity ID
339867
Extra import data
{
"field_legacy_header": "<a id=\"Barclays\"></a><strong><em>Barclays Mercantile Industrial Finance Ltd. v. Melluish</em></strong>, [1990] BTC 209 (Ch. D.)",
"field_override_history": false,
"field_sid": "",
"field_topic_category": "seealso"
}
"field_legacy_header": "<a id=\"Barclays\"></a><strong><em>Barclays Mercantile Industrial Finance Ltd. v. Melluish</em></strong>, [1990] BTC 209 (Ch. D.)",
"field_override_history": false,
"field_sid": "",
"field_topic_category": "seealso"
}