Acceso usuarios
1. Il foro in materia di illeciti complessi, a distanza e con danni plurilocalizzati. - 2. Segue: i principi interpretativi elaborati nella giurisprudenza Shevilled eDate. - 3. La controversia che ha dato origine al caso Ilsjan. - 4. Le conclusioni dell'avvocato generale Bobek. - 5. La soluzione interpretativa adottata dalla Corte di giustizia dell'Unione europea. - 6. Segue: le implicazioni interpretative della sentenza Ilsjan. - 7. Osservazioni conclusive
This article discusses the interpretation of Article 7 No. 2 of the Brussels I-bis Regulation provided by the ECJ in the recent Ilsjan decision concerning an online violation of rights relating to personality. In Ilsjan the ECJ provided that different jurisdiction criteria should apply depending on the type of action that is brought by the plaintiff. In fact, while the same jurisdictional criteria as set forth in eDate shall apply to an action for rectification and removal of defamatory information and damages, the victim of online defamation may bring an action for rectification and removal of defamatory information in any Member State where (i) the publisher is established, or (ii) the alleged victim has bis center of interests. The author therefore suggests to take into account the proposai of Advocate General Bobek to maintain the ubiquity rule (i.e. the forum actus and the forum actoris) and derogate to the mosaic principle.
