A company that feels it has been defamed online can ask for compensation through the justice system in the member state where the ‘centre of its interests’ is located, in other worlds in the country where its reputation has been the most damaged, said advocate general Michal Bobek in conclusions issued on Thursday 13 July in case C-194/16.
Estonian company Bolagsupplysningen does most of its business in Sweden. It has been put on an online blacklist on the Svensk Handel website, an association of Swedish employers, because it is alleged to have committed fraud and deception. More than 1,000 comments have been posted in relation to its inclusion on the blacklist. The Estonian company took a case to court in its home country, asking for the court to demand its removal from the blacklist and for removal of the comments published on the Swedish association’s website. It also asked for damages of €56,634.99, including interest on damage to its business.
The Estonian company sought compensation through the Estonian legal system because it felt that the centre of its interests was in its home country, although most of its business is done in Sweden. It used European Court of Justice case law (case C-509/09) to make this demission, which authorises an individual to take a case to court in a country different from the one where the defender is registered (a special competence rule vis-à-vis the usual measures from the Brussels I b Regulation 2015/2012).
The judge sees no justification for the special competence rules to apply differently depending on whether the plaintiff is an individual or a company. He says that in the internet age, an individual is not necessarily the weakest party in a dispute with a company.
Bobek says that in terms of the special competence rule for court cases over defamation online, the place where the defamation took place probably corresponds to the place where the person’s reputation has suffered the most damage. In cases of defamation, this is the real centre of the dispute, where the person or company has his/her/its business interests.
Relevant factors. In order to determine the centre of interest of a company, the judge says that relevant factors include major commercial activities or other professional activities (determined by turnover, number of clients, professional contacts); - the country where the company has its head office, except where no professional activity is carried out in that member state and if the company does not generate any turnover there.
Bobek recognises that for both individuals and companies, there can be more than one centre of interests. In such cases, the plaintiff shall select the country where he or she would like to take the case to court. Once the choice is made and the case beings, he or she will not be allowed to launch legal action elsewhere in this connection. The relevant court just rules on the entirety of the alleged damages and measures to be taken, including, as in the present case, measures relating to the demand for removal of the offending information. (Original version in French by Mathieu Bion)