Aviator Secures Court of Appeal Ruling on Use of Georgian Court Findings in the UK

Aviator has won a key appeal in its long-running legal dispute with Spribe, after England’s Court of Appeal overturned an earlier High Court decision on how findings from foreign court proceedings should be treated in the case.

Read more Marlin Masters: Frozen Frenzy Slot Review

The ruling does not decide the wider copyright battle between the two companies, but it deals with an important procedural question linked to earlier litigation in Georgia.

At the centre of the dispute is whether conclusions reached by Georgian courts can prevent certain issues from being argued again in England. The Court of Appeal found in Aviator’s favour, holding that English law should determine that question rather than the copyright laws of the countries involved in the infringement claims.

Appeal court overturns earlier High Court ruling

The case forms part of a wider dispute over the popular Aviator crash game and related intellectual property rights. Aviator, whose group includes companies based in Georgia and Malta, claims ownership of copyright in the Aviator logo and aircraft design used in connection with the game.

Spribe, the Estonian developer behind its own Aviator-branded crash game, denies those claims and argues that its artwork was created independently. The parties are also fighting over trademarks, passing-off allegations and copyright claims across multiple jurisdictions. 

Just a month ago, Spribe secured a provisional injunction from the Maltese courts against three companies tied to Aviator Studio, with the judge finding that Aviator Studio’s branding created a clear risk of confusion with Spribe’s registered EU trademarks.

The major issue in the English proceedings comes from earlier litigation in Georgia. There, Aviator successfully challenged a Georgian trademark registered by Spribe. Following decisions by the Georgian courts, including an unsuccessful appeal by Spribe before the Supreme Court of Georgia, Aviator argued that some of the matters decided in those proceedings should not be reopened in England.

Read more Dallas Cowboys

The earlier High Court ruling sided with Spribe and held that the relevant copyright laws should determine whether the Georgian findings had that effect. The Court of Appeal reached the opposite conclusion.

Lord Justice Arnold said the question was not really about copyright liability but about the effect of a previous judgment in another jurisdiction. Because of that, English law should apply.

Court warns of inconsistent outcomes with Spribe’s approach

Lord Justice Arnold stressed that recognition and treatment of foreign court decisions are matters for the receiving court and are traditionally governed by the law of that jurisdiction.

According to the court, issue estoppel is concerned with the handling of litigation rather than the substance of copyright rights.

The court also warned that Spribe’s approach could create inconsistent outcomes. Different laws might apply to the same issue depending on the type of claim involved, while even English judgments could end up being assessed under foreign law in some situations.

Aviator has now secured its first major win since the Court of First Instance in Curaçao invalidated two of its Aviator‑branded trademarks.

Read more Tampa Bay Buccaneers