Volume II

Issue : 5: March 4, 2004

• ICANN Faces Suits over Internet Domain Name Regulatory Practices
• Microsoft Brings Its Battle with Lindows to Canada
• U.S. Federal Trade Commission Levies Fines under the Childrens Online Privacy Protection Act
• California Appeals Court Reverses Order Prohibiting Internet Publication of DVD-Cracking Code
• FDA Sends Warning to Minnesota over its Prescription Drug Website
• Texas Doctor Sentenced to Jail for Prescribing over the Internet
• District Court Enjoins Manufacture and Distribution of DVD copying software
• U.S. Do-Not-Call Registry Does Not Violate the First Amendment
• U.S. Court Rules Extraction of Data by American Company from a Canadian Companys Online Database Does Not Violate DMCA
• UK High Court Asserts Jurisdiction in Internet Libel Case
• U.S. Supreme Court Rules No Recovery against Government for Privacy Act Violations without Actual Damages
• Supreme Court of Canada Rules Law Society's Photocopying Policy Does Not Violate Copyright Law

Home > Volume II > Issue 5: March 4, 2004 > UK High Court Asserts Jurisdiction in Internet Libel Case

UK High Court Asserts Jurisdiction in Internet Libel Case

In the recent case of Don King v. Lennox Lewis, Lion Promotions, L.L.C. and Judd Burstein, the UK High Court dismissed an application to set aside an order of the lower court permitting service of a libel claim out of the jurisdiction. The case involved statements made by one of the defendants, Judd Burstein, on two U.S. boxing websites, accusing Don King of anti-semitism. Don King, Lennox Lewis and Judd Burstein are residents of the U.S., while Lion Promotions is a U.S.-based promotion company.

The defendants had argued that England was not a proper place in which to bring the claim. However, the Court disagreed. It stated that publication is regarded as taking place where the defamatory words are published in the sense of being heard or read and that the publication of an Internet posting takes place when it is downloaded. Important factors for the Court were that Don King has a substantial reputation and considerable business and financial connections in England and that the two boxing websites are frequently accessed by the boxing community in the jurisdiction.

This case follows in the line of two other decisions, Bangoura v. Washington Post (Ontario's Superior Court of Justice) and Dow Jones & Company Inc. v. Gutnik (High Court of Australia), in which, Canadian and Australian courts asserted jurisdiction over defendants based on the fact that the alleged defamatory comments were published online and accessible where the plaintiffs resided.

For a copy of the decision, visit:
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2004/168.html
For a copy of Bangoura, visit:
http://www.canlii.org/on/cas/onsc/2004/2004onsc10181.html
For a copy of Gutnick, visit:
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/high_ct/2002/56.html
For a copy of the previous Laws of .Com summary regarding Bangura, visit:
http://www.lawsof.com/archive/20040205.html