Case Law, Canada: Haaretz.com v Goldhar: Supreme Court rules on jurisdiction and forum in multi-jurisdictional Internet defamation claims – Natasha Holcroft-Emmess

10 07 2018

In Haaretz.com v Goldhar 2018 SCC 28, the Canadian Supreme Court considered jurisdiction and forum conveniens in a multi-jurisdictional Internet libel claim. The Court was divided – allowing the news organisation’s appeal 6:3. All of the Justices concluded that Canada had jurisdiction to hear the claim, but a majority found that Israel was a clearly more appropriate forum. Read the rest of this entry »





Canada: Haaretz.com v Goldhar: Supreme Court set to pronounce on forum and jurisdiction in Internet libel claim – Natasha Holcroft-Emmess

14 02 2018

In Haaretz.com et al v Mitchell Goldhar (SCC case no. 37202), the Supreme Court of Canada is asked to decide whether the court in Ontario has jurisdiction to hear a defamation claim arising from an article widely published in Israel, but read online by a number of people in Canada. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law: Butt v Home Secretary: Government press release identifying “extremist hate speaker” was “opinion” – Natasha Holcroft-Emmess

5 11 2017

In the case of Butt v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] EWHC 2619 (QB) Nicol J held that a Government Press Release  which meant that the claimant,  Dr Salman Butt, was an extremist hate speaker constituted a statement of opinion, not of fact. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Strasbourg: Tamiz v UK: Article 8 complaint inadmissible, wide margin of appreciation on defamatory blog comment removal process – Natasha Holcroft-Emmess

17 10 2017

In Tamiz v UK, defamatory allegations published in blog comments remained online for over three months without national courts providing a remedy, but the European Court of Human Rights declared inadmissible a complaint that the UK had breached its positive obligation under Article 8 ECHR to provide protection for reputation. Read the rest of this entry »