Jump to content

Recommended Posts

ECJ adapts established tort law for internet cases


Kevin Bays, media and IP partner, Davenport Lyons

In cases involving member states of the EU, the basic principle is that proceedings should be brought in the courts of the state of the defendant?s domicile.

However, according to Article 5(3) of the relevant regulation proceedings may also be brought, in matters relating to tort, in the courts of the state where the harmful event occurred. This includes both the place where the damage occurred and the event giving rise to it. In the case of a libellous newspaper article, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) held, in Shevill & Ors v Presse ?Alliance (1995), that the place of the event giving rise to the damage is where the publisher is ?established?. A claimant may bring an action in the courts of the state where the publisher is established for all the harm caused by the libel.

Alternatively, a claimant may bring a separate action in every member state in which the defamatory words are distributed and in which he has a reputation - but only in respect of the injury suffered by him in that state - the courts of which deal with the merits of the case in accordance with national law.

The principles of Shevill also apply to torts other than defamation, such as the infringement of privacy rights, and to other means of communication, including publication on the internet.

A claimant may bring an action for an internet libel/breach of privacy in the member state where the publisher was domiciled or established in respect of all the damage caused by the publication, wherever it occurred within Europe.

Alternatively, the claimant may bring separate proceedings in each member state in which he claims to have suffered an infringement of his rights and the publication has been ?distributed?.

The ECJ, recognising the special characteristics of the internet, drew a distinction between the physical distribution of newspapers and online publication.

As the latter is intended to ensure the ubiquity of the content throughout the world, the criterion for jurisdiction relating to distribution is of limited value.

In view of the difficulties involved in applying the criterion of the occurrence of damage to online publications, the ECJ decided that the Shevill principle should be adapted in internet cases.

It held that a person whose personality rights (including reputation and privacy) have been infringed on the internet may now bring one action in respect of all the damage caused by the publication in the courts of the place in which he has the ?centre of his interests?.

A person having the centre of his interests in France may therefore bring an action in the French courts, applying French law in respect of an internet publication accessible there, and seek to recover damages for all the harm alleged to have been ?suffered in all member states.

Alternatively, a claimant may choose to sue in any state from which the internet publication is accessible for the damage alleged to have been caused in that particular state.

What is clear is that claimants now seem to have the benefit of a forum ?supermarket? as well as the local shops.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/21595-copied-from-the-lawyer/
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • DD, "Rejoice rejoice. It's a pity he and his fellow clowns were completely annihilated at the ballot box. I mean they were doing so well after all 🙃🙃" At least the economy and unemployment weren't in the mess they are now. What is it, give the public sector a whopping pay increase with no strings attached, double the black hole and then blame it on the last Govt. Give me strength. Rachel from accounts shouldn't be anywhere near the economy. The final straw was increasing employer NI contributions and look how that's worked out. Month on month both inflation and unemployment have risen. Won't be long before inflation and u/e are exceeding 5%, but guess what, They'll blame Sunak and go.  Lets have a snap election right NOW, then see how poorly Starmer, Reeves and Rainer do. They're already plotting to get rid of Starmer, and if you think its bad now, you ain't seen nothing yet. Oh and did I mention Starmer wanting to stop Freedom of Speech............................................Normal people can see right through what him and co are doing, great at spending other peoples money, him and co don't have = bankruptcy. We'll just repeat the economic collapse that happened in Greece and wasn't it in Italy as well?
    • One of the best of Shakespeare 's plays.  I did Othello for A level. Also seen a number of stage and film versions. Is there any specific aspects of the play that is difficult for your daughter to understand?  
    • @Sue think this is your quote.  It wasn't binary, good Vs bad, and Corbyn had a lot of popular support, as evidenced by the previous election. He had aot of good policies, some picked up by others since. He was defeated by a mixture of a right wing press,good targeting the Johnson 'Get Brexit Done" and for some that Johnson was a funny loveable rogue/fool/liar/philander/opportunist.  I wouldn't see choosing the perceived least worst candidate out of the two major parties as being "good sense'.  We imagine that Corbyn would have been terrible, but we don't know.  He would have taken a stronger line against Israel in Gaza, not sucked up to Trump nut on Russia?  Would the UK be better for that?
    • We have had 4 greyhounds - the last one, a bitch, was not speyed so we  had to pay for that at our local vet.  Only one dog was nervous around children and only one was cat friendly.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...