Ordo Templi Orientis Phenomenon
Copyrights

1. The Claimant is incorporated under the laws of the state of California, USA.
2. The 1st Defendant and Louis Wilkinson were appointed the literary executors of Edward Alexander Crowley (commonly known as Aleister Crowley) by Mr Crowley’s will which was dated 19th June 1947.
3. Mr Crowley died on 1st December 1947.
4. Mr Wilkinson died in 1966. Thereafter, the 1st Defendant continued or purported to continue as the sole literary executor of Mr Crowley.
5. Probate of Mr Crowley's will was granted out of the Lewes District Probate Registry on 24th January 1949 to Frieda Harris and Louis Wilkinson save and except for the purposes property and effects (including copyrights) of and in connection with the deceased's profession of an author.
6. On 1st March 1971 letters of administration Cum Testamento Annexo of the estate which by law devolved to and vested in the personal representatives of Mr Crowley limited for the purposes, property and effects (including copyrights) of and in connection with the deceased's rofession were granted to the 1st Defendant.
7. By a deed dated 5th April 1998 the 1st Defendant purported to assign to the 2nd Defendant all property and effects (including copyrights) which the deed purported to declare had devolved and vested in the 1st Defendant as the sole surviving literary executor of Mr Crowley.
8. By the same document, alternatively in writing on the same date, the 1st Defendant further purported to appoint the 2nd Defendant as literary executor of Aleister Crowley with immediate effect. The 1st Defendant had no power in law to make such an appointment which is void and of no effect.
9. The 3rd Defendant is a company registered in England and of which the 2nd Defendant is director, company secretary and the owner of 40,018 of its 40,100 issued shares. On a date which the Claimant cannot specify in advance of discovery save that it was some weeks before 20th September 1999 the 2nd Defendant transferred or purported to transfer the Crowley copyrights to the 3rd Defendant by virtue of the ownership and authority (supposedly) vested in him vested in him by the assignment referred to in paragraph 7 above and also on behalf of the 1st Defendant.

Aleister Crowley

10. Aleister Crowley was born in England in 1875. He was a British subject by birth and remained so until his death.
11. Mr Crowley became world head of an organisation known as "Ordo Templi Orientis" (or OTO) in about 1923 and remained its head until his death on 1st December 1947. His title was "Outer Head of the Order" (or OHO).
12. During his life-time Mr Crowley wrote a great many books, articles, poetry and other literary works all of which were original literary works ("Mr Crowley's literary works"). Further Mr Crowley was the author of and created certain original artistic works ("Mr Crowley’s artistic works"). Mr Crowley’s literary and artistic works are referred to collectively as "Mr Crowley’s works". The best particulars which the Claimants can provide are set out in the Schedule served herewith. [not online]
13. As set out in the schedule, Mr Crowley's works were either first published in the United Kingdom, first published in the United States of America, France, Italy or Tunisia or remained unpublished at the time of his death. The Schedule served herewith also gives the best particulars that the Claimant can provide of authorised publications before and after Mr Crowley’s death.
14. In consequence literary copyright subsisted in Mr Crowley's literary works and artistic copyright subsisted in Mr Crowley’s artistic works.
15. Mr Crowley was the first owner of the literary copyright in all of his literary works and the first owner of the artistic copyright in his artistic works.
16. On 1st February 1935 a receiving order in bankruptcy was made against Mr Crowley. He was an undischarged bankrupt at the time of his death.
17. By operation of law the trustee in bankruptcy became the owner of all copyrights then vested in Mr Crowley and all interests in the same. These included all the copyrights in the literary and artistic works which Mr Crowley had written or created before 1st February 1935 and all interests in the same.
18. It is the Claimant's case that until 1st February 1935 Mr Crowley remained the owner of the copyrights in the works which he had written or created prior to that date. In the alternative, if Mr Crowley had, prior to that date assigned or purported to assign such copyrights, then:
    18. 1 So far as such an assignment purported to transfer rights in works not in existence at the date of the assignment, it would have been ineffective as a matter of law;
    18. 2 If such an assignment took place after 1st July 1912, it would not have conferred on the assignee any right with respect to a work then in existence beyond the expiration of 25 years from the death of Mr Crowley and the reversionary interest expectant on the termination of that period would have been an interest in the copyright retained by Mr Crowley subject to Copyright Act 1911 s.5(2);
    18. 3 If such an assignment took place before 1st July 1912, it would not have conferred any right with respect to a work then in existence beyond the period when copyright would, but for the passing of the Copyright Act 1911, have expired and the remainder of the term conferred by the said Act would have been a reversionary interest owned by Mr Crowley by virtue of Copyright Act 1911 s.24(1)(a).
    18. 4 On Mr Crowley's bankruptcy any reversionary interest in any of his copyright works which interest existed by virtue of s.5(2) and/or s.24(1)(a) would also have passed by operation of law to the trustee in bankruptcy.
19. Further, Mr Crowley created further works after 1st February 1935. Further particulars are set out in the Schedule. Copyright subsisted in these works. The copyrights in all Mr Crowley's literary and artistic works (whenever written or created) are referred to herein collectively as the "Crowley copyrights". Mr Crowley was or would but for his bankruptcy have been the first owner of the copyrights in his works written or created after 1st February 1935. The trustee in bankruptcy by operation of law became the owner of all copyrights in such works.

Assignment to the Claimant from Trustee in Bankruptcy

20. At all material times the trustee in bankruptcy of Mr Crowley has been the Official Receiver or a person acting on the Official Receiver's behalf or on the Official Receiver’s nomination.
21. Between 1st February 1935 and 28th March 1991 the trustee in bankruptcy did not assign or otherwise deal in any of the copyrights in any of the works of Mr Crowley or any rights or interests in such copyrights.
22. By an assignment by deed dated 28th March 1991, the trustee in bankruptcy (George Albert Auger) assigned to the Claimant (inter alia) all such rights of copyright and interests therein (if any) as the Trustee might have had and all rights of whatever nature in the literary works of Aleister Crowley for the residue of the respective terms of such copyrights. The Claimant will refer to the said deed for its full terms and effect.
23. By a letter dated 21st August 1995 B. Robinson, Assistant Official Receiver, confirmed that the assignment of 28 th March 1991 was intended to cover all the works of Mr Crowley including his illustrations and designs.
24. It is the Claimant's primary case that the copyrights (and all interests therein) of which Mr Crowley would otherwise have been the owner in any of his works whether written before or after his bankruptcy passed by operation of law to the trustee in bankruptcy before Mr Crowley's death. In consequence, on Mr Crowley's death, his testamentary estate included none of the said copyrights and no interest in any such copyrights. Accordingly, the 1st Defendant's position as literary executor of Mr Crowley gave him no right or title to authorise any of the acts which are the exclusive right of the copyright owner or otherwise to do any such acts.

Assignment from Dodd Mead Inc and Evangeline Adams

25. Further or alternatively, in or about 1916 Mr Crowley wrote a work or works which was or were commissioned by Evangeline Adams and first published simultaneously in London by Harrap and in New York by Dodd Mead Inc in 1928 as "Astrology, Your Place in the Sun" and "Astrology, Your Place Among the Stars" which was first published simultaneously in London by Putnam’s and in New York by Dodd Mead Inc in 1930.
26. The publications referred to above were without the consent or authority of Mr Crowley.
27. If and so far as the copyrights in the said works were not first owned by Mr Crowley, they were owned by Dodd Mead Inc and/or Evangeline Adams. The said works are referred to herein as the "Ms Adams’ works".
28. Dodd Mead Inc assigned to the Claimant all their right, title and interest to copyright in the said works by an agreement in writing dated 14 th March 1989.
29. The successor in title to Evangeline Adams was in 1989 the Society for the Preservation of New England Antiquities ("the Society"). By letters dated 2nd June 1989 and 20 th November 1989 the Society assigned to the Claimant the copyright of Ms Adams in the said work.

Claim through Mr Crowley's will

30. If, contrary to the above, Mr Crowley did own the copyrights in his works or any interests in them or any of them at the time of his death, he bequeathed them by his will as follows:
    "I bequeath free of all death duties all copyright in my books and writings whatsoever and wheresoever over which at the date of my death I may have any power of disposition to the Ordo Templi Orientis aforesaid (other than those copyrights which shall already be the propert y of the Order) for the absolute use and benefit of the said Order AND I DECLARE that the receipt of the Grand Treasurer General of the said Order shall be a sufficient discharge to my literary executors."
31. As recited in the will, at the date of its execution the Grand Treasurer General of the Ordo Templi Orientis was Karl Germer of 260 West 72nd Street, New York City, New York, USA. Mr Germer continued to be the Grand Treasurer General at the date of Mr Crowley's death.
32. On its true construction, the said bequest was a gift to Mr Germer to hold on trust for the members of the Order beneficially, but on the basis that its subject-matter fell to be dealt with in accordance with the rules of the Order by which its members were contractually bound inter se and was, as such, a valid gift.
33. Further or alternatively following Mr Crowley's death, the jurisdiction with which the Order had the closest and most real connection and/or where its central management or control was exercised and/or its domicile was the state of California USA.

PARTICULARS

33. 1 In 1947 the only group of the Order which held meetings and carried out the aims of the organisation was Agape Lodge of California. This lodge had been active since 1935.
33. 2 The majority of the members of the Order world-wide were in California. There were only isolated members in other jurisdictions.
33. 3 In the years immediately before his death, much if not most, of Mr Crowley's personal income came from dues and donations from the California membership of the Order.
33. 4 In the 6 years preceding Mr Crowley's death at least two of the Crowley works ("Fun of the Fair" in 1942 and "Thumbs Up: A Pentagram-A Pantacle to Win the War" 1941) were co-published in England and California and were produced in England using funds raised in California.
33. 5 At Crowley's death about £450 in publication funds was found among Crowley's effects and recognised as funds of the Order by the Trustee in Bankruptcy and returned to Mr Germer as trustee for the Order. These funds were raised largely from the members of the Order in California.
33. 6 In the 7 years preceding Mr Crowley's death, members of OTO took practical steps to acquire and register property in California with the intention that this should be the world headquarters of the Order and a residence for Mr Crowley. Mr Germer subsequently moved to Barstow, California in the early 1950s and, after further moves settled in West Point California in 1956.
33. 7 In the 1940s before his death, Mr Crowley openly discussed plans to relocate to California to be nearer the centre of the Order's activity and his source of support.
33. 8 In the 26 years preceding Mr Crowley's death California was the only place in the world where the initiation rituals and regular religious observances written by Mr Crowley for the Order were conducted.
33. 9 In the 6 months before his death, Mr Crowley specified three officers to govern the Order after his death. These were Mr Germer (who lived in New York and who was the sole member of the Order who lived in that state), Grady McMurtry (who lived in California) and Frederic Mellinger (who lived in Germany at the time of Crowley’s death but who had been a member of the California lodge of OTO in 1941-1943).
33. 10 In March 1946 Mr Crowley wrote to Grady McMurtry in California to put him in charge of the Order in California in case of emergency. In April 1946 this authority was increased by Mr Crowley so as to make Mr McMurtry Mr Crowley's representative in the USA. Both authorizations were made subject to Mr Germer's approval and, in the case of the April authorization, to Mr Germer’s veto or revisions. Mr Germer did approve of these authorizations and did not veto or revise them.
33. 11 No other OTO member in any other country after World War II held authorizations comparable to those of Mr Germer.
33. 12 Although Mr Crowley regarded Mr Germer as his immediate successor (see for instance his letter to Mr Germer of 6th June 1947), he indicated to Mr McMurtry that in view of Mr Germer’s age, Mr McMurtry should consider himself a likely successor to Mr Germer. The Claimant will refer to the letters from Mr Crowley to Mr McMurtry of 22nd August 1944, 21st November 1944 and 17th June 1947.

34. By the law of California at the time of Mr Crowley's death, the gift to Ordo Templi Orientis would have been valid.

PARTICULARS

34. 1 By chapter 402 of the Probate Code of California (following its amendment in 1939) an unincorporated benevolent or fraternal society or association or a lodge or branch of such a society or association was authorized and empowered to receive, own and hold all such property as may be necessary for the business purposes and objects of the said society or association or lodge or branch, subject to the laws and regulations of the said society or association.
34. 2 The Ordo Templi Orientis was an unincorporated benevolent or fraternal society or association. The Crowley copyrights were necessary for the business purposes and objects of the Order.
34. 3 Further or alternatively, the said chapter 402 further provided that all unincorporated benevolent or fraternal societies could take and receive by will or deed all property not so necessary and to hold the same until disposed of within a period of 10 years from the acquisition thereof.
34. 4 Further or alternatively, the Claimant will rely on paragraph 21200 of the California Corporations Code (following its amendment in 1947) to the like effect.

35. If, contrary to the Claimant's primary case, the copyrights did form part of Mr Crowley's testamentary estate, title to them vested in the 1st Defendant and Louis Wilkinson at the time of Mr Crowley's death as his literary executors.
36. Title to the said copyrights passed to Mr Germer on trust for the members of the Ordo Templi Orient is by virtue of the implied assent of the literary executors or one of them and on such assent Mr Germer was to be regarded as the legal owner of the copyrights from the death of Mr Crowley. Alternatively, if the assent of the literary executors or executor took place after Mr Germer's death, on such assent title passed to his successor as trustee of the Order or the Claimant as successor to the Order. The Claimant will say that such assent is to be implied from the conduct of the 1st Defendant and/or Mr Wilkinson. The best particulars that the Claimant can give prior to discovery are the following:
    36. 1 Correspondence took place between Mr Germer and Mr Wilkinson in which it is clear that Mr Wilkinson regarded the copyrights as a matter which was under the control of Mr Germer. The Claimant will refer in particular to the following letters: Germer to Symonds 1st February 1948; Germer to Wilkinson 9th February 1948; Germer to Wilkinson 13th February 1948; Wilkinson to Germer 19th February 1948.
    36. 2 In 1948 the 1st Defendant was writing a biography of Aleister Crowley. As of 25th August 1948 at the latest, he considered that Mr Germer controlled the Crowley copyrights.
    36. 3 Further or alternatively, such assent was manifested by the 1st Defendant’s purported transfer of copyrights to Kenneth Grant in or about 1965 as referred to in the 1st Defendant's letters to William Heidrick of 26th August 1985 and 4th November 1985.
    36. 4 In the further alternative, such assent was manifested by the 1st Defendant’s purported transfer of copyrights to the 2nd Defendant as set out below.

37. Mr Germer did not dispose of the legal title to (or any other interest in) the said copyrights during his lifetime. He died in California on 25th October 1962.
38. Mr Germer had executed a will in New York on 4 th December 1951. This left his personal property to his wife and named her the sole "executive" of this part of his will. The will further provided that "As regards the property of the Ordo Templi Orientis, of which I am the Head, I direct that this is passed to the Heads of the Order, but that my wife, Mrs Sascha E. Andre-Germer, has to be the executor of this part of my will, together with Frederic Mellinger IX of the OTO."
39. This will was never admitted to probate and no action in relation to the estate was taken by Mr Mellinger. However, in various respects Sascha Germer assumed the responsibility of executrix of her husband’s property both personal and that which he held as head of OTO. The Claimant will refer inter alia to the following:
    39. 1 On 15 th February 1963 she drew a cheque for $621.85 on an account at Bank of Amador County payable to herself. She signed the cheque "Karl Germer deceased by Sascha Andre Germer". The account in question had been used by Mr Germer for managing the OTO trust. Cheques for OTO donations and book sales were paid into the account and payments (for instance to the (US) Registrar of Copyrights) had been drawn on the account by Mr Germer.
    39. 2 Sascha Germer retained possession of various books, papers, manuscripts and art objects which Mr Germer had had in his capacity as head of, or alternatively as Grand Treasurer General of the OTO.

40. Sascha Germer died on 2nd April 1975 in Calaveras County, State of California.
41. Sascha Germer died intestate. Her estate was administered by Adolph Gualdoni who was appointed by the Superior Court of the State of California in and for the County of Calaveras.
42. By an order of the said Court on 26th July 1976 it was recited that it appeared to the Court that Grady L. McMurtry was the duly constituted and authorized representative of the Ordo Templi Orientis and that at the time of her death Sascha Germer had in her possession books, papers, manuscripts, letters and art objects belonging to the Ordo Templi Orientis which items were then held by Mr Gualdoni. On the Petition of Mr McMurtry the Court ordered that Mr Gualdoni deliver all of the books, papers, manuscripts, letters and art objects belonging to the Ordo Templi Orient is in Mr Gualdoni's possession to Grady McMurtry, the duly authorised representative of the Ordo Templi Orientis to be held by him for the benefit of the Ordo Templi Orientis.
43. By an order dated 27th October 1997 the Superior Court of California, Calaveras County made a further order correcting a clerical order and amending the 1976 order nunc pro tunc as of 27th July 1976 to the effect that it was further ordered that any and all copyrights to works of Aleister Crowley held by the estate of Sascha Germer were thereby transferred to Grady L. McMurtry, the duly authorized representative of the Ordo Templi Orientis, to be held by him for the benefit of the Ordo Templi Orientis.
44. The effect of the amending order was to treat the 1976 Order as if it had been made originally in the amended terms.
45. In 1976 Ordo Templi Orientis was and had been since 28th December 1971 an incorporated but registered association in the State of California. In 1979 this association was incorporated in the state of California. The Claimant is this corporation.
46. If and so far as may be necessary, the Claimant will contend that Mr McMurtry was entitled to and did act as the international head of OTO and the trustee of the property of OTO after the death of Mr Germer and will rely on the following in addition to the matters set out above:
    46. 1 No other OTO member in any country held comparable authorizations from Mr Crowley;
    46. 2 After Mr Germer’s death, Mr McMurtry was the ranking OTO officer in the world and the only one who held the powers of the world head (or OHO) by appointment from a previous OHO.
    46. 3 Mr McMurtry had in effect been appointed by Mr Crowley as a backup successor to Mr Germer in case Mr Germer died without a successor.
    46. 4 The Claimant will refer to the matters set out in paragraphs 32.9 - 32.12 above.

47. In or about 1981 Grady McMurtry made a gift to the Claimant of (inter alia) books, papers and correspondence which were of special interest to the Claimant, as well as passing to them all those items which Mr McMurtry held as trustee for the Ordo Templi Orientis. The said gift was memorialized by Mr McMurtry in a written acknowledgement of prior gift dated 26th June 1985.
48. Mr McMurtry died on 12 th July 1985. William Breeze became acting OHO or Frater Superior on 21st September 1985 and remains in that position as well as being the Claimant’s Corporate Chief Executive Officer.
49. The Claimant has been held to be the successor in title to the Crowley copyrights by the United States District Court for the Northern District of California in the case of Grady McMurtry vs Society Ordo Templi Orientis in Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law of 10th July 1985, its Judgment of 10th September 1985 and by its Additional Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law of 6th April 1987. The District Court's decision was affirmed by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on 4th June 1987. The United States Supreme Court denied a petition for a writ of certiorari on 11th January 1988.
50. In consequence of the above, if the Claimant's primary case is not correct and Mr Crowley's copyrights formed part of his testamentary estate, the Claimant is the successor in title to the legal and beneficial interests in those copyrights and is now their owner.

The Defendants’ infringements and denial of the Claimant's title

51. Notwithstanding the above, the 1st Defendant, without the licence of the trustee in bankruptcy or of the Claimant (or, so far as may be relevant, such other person as was in accordance with the facts and matters pleaded above, the owner of the Crowley copyrights at the material time) has infringed copyright in various of Mr Crowley's works and/or the Evangeline Adams works inter alia by:
    1. Reproducing all or a substantial part of certain of the works of Mr Crowley and/or Ms Adams in a material form;
    2. Issuing to the public copies of all or a substantial part of certain of the works of Mr Crowley and/or Ms Adams, that is putting into circulation copies not previously put into circulation; and/or
    3. Authorising the said acts.
    The Claimant will seek to recover in respect of all acts of infringement but before discovery and/or interrogatories herein will rely upon the facts and matters set out in the schedule hereto and the printing and sale of the works referred to in Part B 2 – 5 and Tables 1 - 4 of the said Schedule.

52. Further the 1st Defendant has on numerous occasions claimed that he is the owner of the Crowley copyrights and that the Claimant has no such claim. The Claimant will refer by way of example to the 1st Defendant's letter to a Mr Peter Koenig of 27th January 1997.
53. On or about 10th February 1998 the 1st Defendant was notified by a letter of that date from the Claimant's solicitors inter alia of its right to the Crowley copyrights including copyright in Crowley’s "Confessions". The letter sought an unequivocal acknowledgement of the Claimant's ownership of the Crowley copyrights.
54. The 1st Defendant refused to give any such acknowledgement. On the contrary, by a letter dated 1st March 1998 to the Claimant's solicitors he said "I will have you know that I am the sole owner of these copyrights."
55. Further, on or about 5th April 1998, as referred to above, the 1st Defendant by deed:
    55. 1 declared that he had not previously assigned or disposed of the property and effects (including copyrights and all interests therein) which had devolved and vested in him as sole surviving literary executor of Mr Crowley ;
    55. 2 purported to transfer to the 2nd Defendant, without restriction or reservation all property and effects (including copyrights and all interests therein) which had devolved and vested in him as the sole surviving literary executor of Mr Crowley for the absolute use and benefit of the 2nd Defendant.

56. The 2nd Defendant likewise denies that the Claimant is entitled to the Crowley copyrights.
57. The 3rd Defendant likewise denies that the Claimant is entitled to the Crowley copyrights.
58. The 2nd and/or 3rd Defendants have also, without the licence of the trustee in bankruptcy or of the Claimant (or, so far as may be relevant, such other person as was in accordance with the facts and matters pleaded above, the owner of the Crowley copyrights at the material time) infringed copyright in various of Mr. Crowley works and/or the Evangeline Adams works inter alia by:
    1. Reproducing all or a substantial part of certain of the works of Mr. Crowley and/or Ms Adams in a material form;
    2. Issuing to the public copies of all or a substantial part of certain of the works of Mr Crowley and/or Ms Adams, that is putting into circulation copies not previously put into circulation; and/or
    3. Authorising the said acts.
    The Claimant will seek to recover in respect of all acts of infringement but before discovery and/or interrogatories herein will rely upon the facts and matters set out in the schedule hereto and the printing and sale of the works referred to in Part B 5 and Tables 2 and 4 of the said Schedule.

59. In the circumstances, unless restrained by this Honourable Court, the 1st, 2nd and/or 3rd Defendants intend to and will infringe the Claimant's rights in the Crowley copyrights.

Financial and proprietary consequences

60. By reason of the Defendants’ infringements of copyright the Claimant has suffered loss and damage.
61. By their acts of infringement as referred to above, well knowing that they have thereby infringed the copyrights of which the Claimant is the owner, the Defendants and each of them have acted in flagrant disregard of the Claimant’s rights. In consequence, the Claimant is entitled to and claims from the Defendants and each of them additional damages pursuant to Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 s.97(2).

PARTICULARS

61. 1 The 1st Defendant was well aware that as literary executor he had no beneficial entitlement to the Crowley copyrights;
61. 2 The 1st Defendant was well aware of the Claimant’s claim that it was the owner of the Crowley copyrights by both assignment from the Official Receiver and as successor to the beneficiary named in Mr. Crowley’s will. The Claimant will refer to the letter before action referred to in paragraph 51 above.
61. 3 In response to the letter before action the 1st Defendant not only refused to recognise the Claimant’s entitlement but asserted that he was the sole owner and thereupon proceeded to purport to assign the copyrights to the 2nd Defendant.
61. 4 The 2nd Defendant purported to take the assignment although he was aware of the Claimant’s claims and he proceeded to infringe or further infringe the Claimants’ copyright.
61. 5 The 3rd Defendant purported to take the transfer of copyrights although (through the 2nd Defendant, its director) it was aware of the Claimant’s claims and it has proceeded to infringe or further infringe the Claimant’s copyright.

62. Further, or alternatively, if contrary to the Claimant’s contentions, the Crowley copyrights did form part of Mr Crowley’s testamentary estate and the literary executor or executors did not assent to the gift of them being distributed, the 1st Defendant as the personal representative of Mr Crowley is to be treated as though he were and has been trustee of them for the benefit of the Claimant and its predecessors in title. The Claimant is entitled to recover from the 1st Defendant the copyrights as trust property. Furthermore, any benefits received by the 1st Defendant as a consequence of his dealings in the copyrights are and have been held by him as trustee for the Claimant which is entitled to recover the same and any such benefits which were previously received by him and converted to his use.
63. Further to the previous paragraph and on the premises there set out, as from 5th April 1998 and the 2nd Defendant’s purported assumption of the position of literary executor of Aleister Crowley and the purported assignment of the Crowley copyrights by the 1st Defendant to the 2nd Defendant who took with knowledge of the Claimant’s entitlements or claims and/or who gave no consideration for the assignment, has held the said copyrights and all benefits received by the 2nd Defendant as a consequence of the 2nd Defendant’s dealings with the copyrights on trust for the Claimant.
64. Further to the previous two paragraphs and in the premises there set out, the 3rd Defendant took the purported assignment of the Crowley copyrights from the 2nd Defendant with knowledge of the Claimant’s entitlements or claims such knowledge deriving from the knowledge of the 2nd Defendant, a director of the 3rd Defendant. In consequence on the premises set out in the previous two paragraphs, the 3rd Defendant has held the said copyrights and all benefits received by the 3rd Defendant as a consequence of the 3rd Defendant’s dealings with the copyrights on trust for the Claimant.
65. On such sums as are found due to the Claimant the Claimant will further seek interest for such period and at such rate as the Court considers just pursuant to Supreme Court Act 1981 s.35A.

AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS:

1. A declaration that the Claimant is the legal and equitable owner of the Crowley copyrights.
2. An injunction to restrain the Defendants or any of them whether by their servants, agents or howsoever, from doing the following acts or any of them, that is to say, without the Claimant’s licence:
   1. Reproducing the works of Mr Crowley or Ms Adams or any of them or any substantial part of any of them;
   2. Issuing to the public copies of the works of Mr Crowley or Ms Adams or any of them or any substantial part of any of them;
   3. Possessing in the course of a business, selling, offering for sale, exposing for sale or in the course of a business exhibiting in public, or distributing infringing copies of the works of Mr Crowley or Ms Adams or any of them;
   4. Authorising any of the above acts;
   5. In any other manner infringing the Claimant’s copyright in Mr. Crowley's works or Ms Adams' works.

3. If and so far as may be necessary, an order that the 1st and/or 2nd and/or 3rd Defendant assign to the Claimant the Crowley copyrights and all interests in them.
4. An inquiry into damages including additional damages pursuant to Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 s.97(2) or, at the Claimant’s option, an account of profits made by the Defendants and each of them and an order that the 1st and/or 2nd and/or 3rd Defendants pay to the Claimant the sum or sums found due.
5. A declaration that the 1st Defendant holds on trust for the Claimant any benefits received by him as a consequence of his dealings in the Crowley copyrights; an inquiry into the nature and amount of such benefits; and an order that such sums or other benefits be paid or transferred to the Claimant.
6. A declaration that the 2nd Defendant holds on trust for the Claimant any benefits received by him as a consequence of his dealings in the Crowley copyrights on or after 5 th April 1998; an inquiry into the nature and amount of such benefits; and an order that such sums or other benefits be paid or transferred to the Claimant.
7. A declaration that the 3rd Defendant holds on trust for the Claimant any benefits received by it as a consequence of its dealings in the Crowley copyrights on or after the date that they were purportedly transferred to it by the 2nd Defendant; an inquiry into the nature and amount of such benefits; and an order that such sums or other benefits be paid or transferred to the Claimant.
8. A declaration that the Claimant is the legal and equitable owner of such literary copyright as Evangeline Adams had in the works specified against her name in the attached schedule.
9. Delivery up of :
   1. all infringing copies of the Crowley or Adams works or any of them in the possession, custody or control of each respective Defendant;
   2. any article specifically designed or adapted for making copies of the Crowley or Adams works or any of them and which article is in the possession, custody or control of each respective Defendant.

10. An order that all infringing copies or articles delivered up pursuant to paragraph 9 of this prayer for relief be forfeited to the Claimant alternatively be destroyed or otherwise dealt with as the Court shall think fit.
11. A declaration that the purported appointment of the 2nd Defendant as literary executor for Aleister Crowley is void and of no effect.
12. Interest pursuant to Supreme Court Act 1981 s.35A.
13. Such further or other relief as the Court thinks fit.
14. Costs