2005 September 16

Bangoura v. The Washington Post, Ontario Court of Appeal Docket C41379, reversing (2004) 235 D.L.R. (4th) 564 (SCJ), leave to appeal to Supreme Court of Canada denied without reasons: 16 February 2006.

Alleged Cyber Libel: Website posting
Non-Internet Defamation Also Alleged: Yes – printed newspapers
Canadian court has jurisdiction? No
Canadian court should decline jurisdiction? Not relevant

The Ontario Court of Appeal ruled unanimously that a lower court judged erred in ruling that Ontario has jurisdiction to hear a defamation claim based on two articles originally published by the defendant in 1997 on its website (and in its hard copy newspaper) while the plaintiff was living in Kenya. The articles related to the plaintiff’s activities in a prior posting in Ivory Coast as an employee of the United Nations. The plaintiff’s wife and children had moved to Montreal in December 1996.

The Court of Appeal heard from an intervener, Media Coalition, which suggested alternative approaches to the issue of jurisdiction which the Court declined to adopt in this case, stating “[i]t may be that in some future case involving internet publication, this court will find it useful to consider and apply one or more of the proposed approaches.”

See McConchie and Potts, Canadian Libel and Slander Actions, “Jurisdiction simpliciter,” page 147, “Forum Non Conveniens,” pages 152, 153; “Where did the wrong take place,” page 157.