News
Clarence Wijewardena’s widow loses case for copyrights to his compositions
View(s):In a hotly contested case over the rights of the well known musician, the late Clarence Wijewardena, the Western Province, Commercial High Court Judge, this week dismissed a case filed by his widow and daughter seeking a declaration that they are entitled to the economic and moral rights in respect of the lyrics, music composition and melodies of 39 songs composed by him.
Clarence Wijewardena
High Court Judge Mahinda Samayawardhena held that Clarence Wijewardena himself had sold some of his songs during his lifetime to third parties, and in evidence, the Plaintiffs were unable to give specific details where his unsold songs were being performed by Defendant, Annesley Malawana.
Judge Samayawardhena holding in favour of Defendant Malawana, stated that the wife of Clarence Wijewardena did not have a list of his songs, and the only properties listed as belonging to him are the land, his house and a vehicle. Any residual properties were bequeathed to his daughter (who lives in Australia), so that even if the songs, his property, his widow was not entitled to its rights.
The Judge observed that Clarence Wijewardena’s daughter showed no interest in the case, not coming to court at all, while the Defendant was always present, despite the fact that it was not necessary. He said there was a burden on the late musician’s daughter to show that the rights to his songs were passed onto her at the time of his death, which burden had not been discharged.
On the other hand, Defendant Annesley Malawana had shown that several songs, including ‘Sude Menike’; ‘Kalu Mama’; ‘Rosa Male’; ‘Goyam Kapanawa’; ‘Ramani’; ‘Mangalam’ had been transferred to third parties.
In some of these sales, both the late musician and the Defendant on behalf of the groups Moonstones, Super Golden Chimes, New Super Golden Chimes, that had signed the agreements. This shows that these songs were owned by the groups, not an individual.
The judge also referred to the Plaintiff waiting 14 years after her husband’s death to file a claim, while attending musical shows as the chief guest, where the defendant sang these songs. He also held that Defendant Annesley Malawana was not distorting these songs and thereby infringing the moral rights of the late musician’s daughter. “Music loving people enjoy them and the success and popularity of those songs will rest so long as they are sung in their original form,” the High Court Judge said.
The case was dismissed without costs. Dinal Phillips P.C. with Nishantha Sirimanne instructed by Ms. Neelanthi Peiris appeared for the Defendant. Kushan D’ Alwis P.C. with Hiran Jayasuriya instructed by H.G.M. Harankahawa appeared for the Plaintiff.