Appeal and a cross-appeal against a decision of Jay J by which he granted the claimant permission to serve five media defendants in their jurisdictions of domicile in the United States of America with proceedings for libel and limited claims for misuse of private information, but refused permission to serve a variety of other claims advanced by the claimant. The defendants’ appeal challenges the grant of permission to serve the libel claim. It raises issues about s 9 of the Defamation Act 2013, which contains a new test for jurisdiction over libel claims against those domiciled abroad. The claimant’s cross-appeal challenges the refusal to allow service of claims in data protection and malicious falsehood. It raises issues about the territorial scope of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and requires us to consider whether the Judge was right to find that the claimant’s malicious falsehood claims are untenable.
Dame Victoria Sharp, President of the Queen’S Bench Division,
Lady Justice Elisabeth Laing,
And,
Lord Justice Warby
[2021] EWCA Civ 1952
Bailii, Judiciary
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal From – Soriano v Forensic News Llc and Others QBD 15-Jan-2021
Claimant’s contested application to serve-out. . .
See Also – Soriano v Forensic News Llc and Others QBD 13-Apr-2021
Claim in defamation and misuse of private information. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Defamation, Jurisdiction, Information
Updated: 29 December 2021; Ref: scu.670640
