INTERNATIONAL JURISDICTION IN DISPUTES OVER INFRINGIMENT OF PERSONALITY RIGHTS ON THE INTERNET – SERBIAN AND EU LAW

  • Petar Đundić Pravni fakultet Univerziteta U Novom Sadu
Keywords: internet-torts, infringement of personality rights, international jurisdiction of courts, the place of harmful event, the place of damage.

Abstract


Invention and wide-spread use of the internet pose particular challenges for Private International Law. Ubiquitous nature of content placed online, the fact that internet-users are able to create the content themselves and the absence of any meaningful geographic connection between transactions conducted online and a territory of any given country are factors which are, on the one hand, increasing the number of cases with cross-border implications while, as the same time, rendering the use of traditional rules of jurisdiction and choice of law increasingly difficult. This is particularly the case with cross-border infringements of personality rights via the internet. The paper discusses the issue of jurisdiction for this particular category of internet-torts. Based on the analysis of the case law created by the Court of Justice of the European Union and the practice of courts in certain national jurisdictions, the author concludes that a reasonable and purposeful interpretation of the notion “place of damage” as a criterion of special jurisdiction for torts used in Article 53(1) of the Serbian Private International Law Code, entails that for the acceptance of jurisdiction by Serbian courts it is not enough that the relevant content is accessible from the territory of Serbia. It is also necessary that a victim’s habitual residence or main place of business is in Serbia. Such interpretation allows Serbian courts to accept jurisdiction in circumstances in which there is a real and meaningful connection of a dispute with Serbia, provides the plaintiff with efficient legal protection of his rights and guarantees the defendant a reasonable opportunity to foresee a competent forum.    

References

BGH, 2. 3. 2010 – VI ZR 23/09, GRUR 2010, 461.


1968 Brussels Convention on jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, OJ L 299, 31.12.1972, p. 32–42.


Vladimir V. Vodinelić, Građansko pravo, Uvod u građansko pravo i Opšti deo građanskog prava, Beograd, 2012.


Jane C. Ginsburg, The Private International Law of Copyright in an Era of Technological Change, Recueil des cours, vol. 273/1998.


Mihajlo Dika, Gašo Knežević, Srđan Stojanović, Komentar zakona o međunarodnom privatnom i procesnom pravu (Zakon o rešavanju sukoba zakona sa propisima drugih zemalja u određenim odnosima), Beograd, 1991.


Andrew Dickinson, Eva Lein, Andrew James, The Brussels I Regulation Recast, Oxford, 2015.


Lilian Edwards, The Scotsman, the Greek, and the Mauritian Company and the Internet: Where on Earth do Things Happen in Cyberspace, Edinburgh Law Review, vol. 8, 1/2004, 99-111.


Institut de droit international, Injuries to Rights of Personality Through the Use of the Internet: Jurisdiction, Applicable Law and Recognition of Foreign Judgments, 79th session, 8 RES EN, 31 August 2019.


T. Lutzi, Internet Cases in EU Private International Law - Developing a Coherent Approach, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, vol. 66, 3/2017, 687-722.


Tobias Lutzi, Private International Law Online: Internet Regulation and Civil Liability in the EU, Oxford, 2020.


Pedro de Miguel Asensio, Conflict of Laws and the Internet, Cheltenham, Northampton, 2020.


Alex Mills, The Law Applicable to Cross-Border Defamation on Social Media: Whose Law Governs Free Speech in Facebookistan, Journal of Media Law, vol. 7, 1/2015, 1-35.


Opinion of Advocate General Bobek delivered on 13 July 2017, Case C‑194/16, Bolagsupplysningen OÜ, Ingrid Ilsjan v. Svensk Handel AB.


Dušan V. Popović, Marko Jovanović, Pravo interneta (odabrane teme), Beograd, 2017.


Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (recast), OJ L 351, 20.12.2012, p. 1–32.


Marta Requejo Isidro, Brussels I bis : a commentary on Regulation (EU) no 1215/2012, Cheltenham, Northampton, 2022.  


Dan Jerker B. Svantesson, Private International Law and the Internet, 3rd edition, Alphen aan den Rijn, 2016.


Маја Станивуковић, Мирко Живковић, Међународно приватно право, општи део, седмо издање, Београд, 2021.


Symeon C. Symeonides, Cross-Border Infringement of Personality Rights via the Internet (A Resolution of the Institute of International Law), Leiden, Boston, 2021.


Peter D. Trooboff, Globalization, Personal Jurisdiction and the Internet Responding to the Challenge of Adapting Settled Principles and Precedents, Recueil des cours, vol. 415/2021.


Julia Hörnle, Internet Jurisdiction: Law and Practice, Oxford, 2021.


Javier Carrascosa González, The Internet: Privacy and Rights Relating to Personality, Recueil des cours, vol. 378/2016.


Joined Cases C‑509/09 and C‑161/10, eDate Advertising GmbH v. X and Olivier Martinez, Robert Martinez v. MGN Limited, 25. октобар 2011. године.   


Case 21/76 G. J. Bier BV v. Mines de potasse d’Alsace SA, 30. новембар 1976. године.


Case C‑194/16, Bolagsupplysningen OÜ, Ingrid Ilsjan v. Svensk Handel AB, 17. октобар 2017. године.


Case C- 68/ 93 Fiona Shevill v Presse Alliance SA, 7. март 1995. године.    


Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, OJ L 12, 16.1.2001, p. 1–23.


Закон о парничном поступку, Службени гласник РС, бр. 72/2011.


Закон о решавању сукоба закона са прописима других земаља, Службени лист СФРЈ, бр. 43/82.

Published
2023/02/27
Section
Original Scientific Paper