JURE SUMMARY

JURE SUMMARY

The defendant, a Scottish newspaper, published an article in which it was alleged that members of a Scottish football team had chased a photographer of the defendant, robbing him of his camera equipment. The plaintiff, a well known football player, who plays for the team, commenced defamation proceedings against the defendant before the English court. He asserted that readers could understand the article as meaning that he was one of the guilty players. The defendant applied to dismiss or stay the action on the grounds that Scotland was the more appropriate forum in which to bring the claim. The High Court (UK) holds that where the defendant is domiciled in the United Kingdom, so that Article 2 Brussels I Regulation applies, it is for UK law to allocate jurisdiction between the courts for the various territories of the UK (England, Scotland, and Northern Ireland). Such allocation is effected by Schedule 4 to the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982 (as amended). Where that Schedule confers jurisdiction on both the English courts and the Scottish courts (for example, where the defendant is domiciled in Scotland but the alleged tort took place in England), an English court has a discretion to decline jurisdiction in favour of a Scottish court on the ground that the Scottish court is a more appropriate forum for the determination of the case in the interests of the parties and of justice.