Want to stay current on e–commerce law? Sign up for Email Newsletter.
B.C. Court Rules in Midst of Bangoura Decision
The Supreme Court of British Columbia has recently provided its reasons for judgment in Burke v. NYP Holdings, Inc. The case related to a column written by the defendant in the February 27, 2005 edition of the New York Post. The column addressed the alleged activities of the plaintiff during an incident that occurred at a Vancouver hockey game between the Vancouver Canucks and the Colorado Avalanche. It also addressed the anticipated testimony of the plaintiff at a trial in an action commenced in Colorado relating to the incident. The column also appeared on a website maintained by the New York Post. In response to the alleged defamation, the plaintiff commenced an action in Vancouver claiming damages to his reputation.
The Supreme Court of B.C. dismissed the defendants’ request that the pleadings be struck out on jurisdictional grounds. The Court was satisfied that the Plaintiff had met the onus of establishing a “real and substantial connection” between British Columbia and the subject matter of the litigation based on the fact that the alleged defamatory comments were published online. It is interesting to note that this case was decided on the same day as the Court of Appeal for Ontario reversed Bangoura v. Washington Post, an Ontario decision asserting jurisdiction over the Washington Post based on an online publication of an allegedly defamatory article. It will be interesting to see if either of the decisions will be appealed.
For a copy of the decision, visit: