The Western Australia Court of Appeal has recently handed down an interesting decision on the meaning of “publication” in the context of defamatory material posted on the internet. The case is Sims v Jooste (No 2). Continue reading
In the case of Niemela v Google (2015 BCSC 1024) the Supreme Court of British Columbia dismissed a claim for a worldwide interim libel injunction against Google by a Vancouver lawyer who had been subject to online abuse by someone he alleged to have been a former client. The Judge entered summary judgment for Google on the whole action. Continue reading
In the case of Bleyer v Google ( NSWSC 897) the Supreme Court of New South Wales stayed a libel action against Google Inc based on defamatory snippets because the resources of the court and the parties that would be expended were disproportionate to the plaintiff’s interest in obtaining vindication. In the course of her judgment McCallum J held that Google was not the publisher of the results produced by its search engine. Continue reading
Google has for the most part successfully fought off attempts to make it liable for third party publications, or search results. But, given the company’s enormous power and influence over the online world, it is unsurprising that claims against it and its subsidiaries continue to be brought. In Rana v Google Australia Pty Ltd ( FCA 60), an Australian court considered whether such a claim could be made, or served on the American parent company. Continue reading
The real “democratic deficit” in the courts is about limited public access not “unelected judges“, Adam Wagner, a barrister at One Crown Office Row, argued on the UK Human Rights Blog at the weekend, challenging a recent political and media narrative.
In his view, the internet age necessitates “a completely new understanding of the old adage ‘Not only must Justice be done; it must also be seen to be done‘”. Continue reading