Volume IV

Issue : 4: February 23, 2006

• LSAT Fingerprinting Raises Privacy Concerns in Canada
• Korean Supreme Court Applies Libel Law to Electronic Publications
• Thrifty Car Rentals Loses Fight over Thrifty.ca
• Blind Student Sues Retailer over Its Inaccessible Website
• U.S. Court Rules Student Loan Provider Not Required to Encrypt Customers Personal Data
• Italian Government Cracks Down on Online Gambling
• U.S. Trying to Get Around Antigua Online Gaming Decisions
• Online Classified Site Pioneer Craigslist Sued for Housing Ad Bias
• Supreme Court of Canada Denies Leave to Appeal in Key Internet Jurisdiction Case

Home > Volume IV > Issue 4: February 23, 2006 > Supreme Court of Canada Denies Leave to Appeal in Key Internet Jurisdiction Case

Supreme Court of Canada Denies Leave to Appeal in Key Internet Jurisdiction Case

The Supreme Court of Canada has denied leave to the appeal request in Bangoura v. Washington Post, a leading Internet jurisdiction case addressing online defamation. The plaintiff in the case had sought leave to appeal last year’s Ontario Court of Appeal decision, which overturned the trial court’s ruling that asserted jurisdiction over the Washington Post in a dispute over articles that were published online.

The plaintiff, Cheickh Bangoura, had filed suit in Ontario against the Washington Post and three of its reporters in respect of two articles (published in its newspaper and on its website), which he alleged were defamatory. The articles were related to Mr. Bangoura’s conduct during his tenure with the United Nations in the Ivory Coast from September 1993 to December 1994. The articles made specific reference to Mr. Bangoura and alleged that his colleagues at the United Nations had accused him of sexual harassment, financial improprieties and nepotism during his posting in the Ivory Coast. At the time of publication, Mr. Bangoura was posted in Nairobi, Kenya, and was not an Ontario resident. When the action was commenced in April of 2003, more than six years after the publication of the articles, Mr. Bangoura was a resident of Ontario.

The issue before the Ontario Court of Appeal was whether the Ontario court should assume jurisdiction in the case solely based on the fact that the articles were available online. In reversing the decision of the trial judge, the Court of Appeal concluded that there was “no real and substantial connection” between the action and Ontario and that it was not appropriate for an Ontario court to assume jurisdiction. The Supreme Court of Canada’s decision to refuse leave to appeal means that the Court of Appeal’s decision is the final word in this case.

For a copy of the Supreme Court of Canada’s press release, visit:

http://www.lexum.umontreal.ca/csc-scc/en/com/2006/html/06-02-16.3a.wpd.html.

For a copy of the Court of Appeal decision, visit:

Bangoura v. Washington Post