Private international law divides the world into territories, each with its own court system and laws. The internet presents challenges to this neat division. It is difficult to identify where an activity takes place on the internet. Wrongs on the internet leave many questions unanswered in transnational litigation. This paper addresses the private international law aspects of cross-border civil wrongs on the internet. Chapter A introduces the internet, and aims to simplify the technical issues. Chapter B asks which court has jurisdiction in a case of wrongs on the internet. The focus is on two sets of rules commonly applied around the globe: the service abroad provisions and the special jurisdiction provisions. The chapter aims to advance general principles applicable in cases of cross-border wrongs committed on the internet, as to the place where a wrong is committed, and the place where damage is suffered. The issue whether a court can grant an injunction against a foreign defendant in respect of foreign conduct is also explored. The exercise of jurisdiction under the service abroad provisions is discretionary. Chapter C examines the forum (non) conveniens discretion in the context of wrongs on the internet. It concludes that, of the US jurisdictional principles developed in internet cases, the sliding scale test should be treated with caution, but the effects test (targeting) should be a factor that is taken into account, in exercising the discretion. Chapter D asks which law applies to a wrong on the internet, concentrating on the divergent choice of law rules in tort in Australia, Canada, the UK and those proposed in the EU. The two chapters that follow consider wrongs to which the internet environment is particularly susceptible, and which deserve separate treatment: intellectual property infringements (Chapter E) and defamation (Chapter F). The final topic, recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments relating to wrongs on the internet, is the subject of Chapter G. The paper rejects the suggestions that new rules should be developed for wrongs on the internet, and concludes that the existing private international law rules are largely workable in the internet context, but require some flexibility in order to be adaptable.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:bl.uk/oai:ethos.bl.uk:439698 |
| Date | January 2006 |
| Creators | Bigos, Oren |
| Publisher | University of Oxford |
| Source Sets | Ethos UK |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Electronic Thesis or Dissertation |
| Source | https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:b93606c0-d750-4a00-9635-3b1d16b14d5f |
Page generated in 0.0129 seconds