Grading AG Szpunar’s Opinion in Case C-18/18 – A Caution Against Worldwide Content Blocking As Default

8 Pages Posted: 20 Jun 2019 Last revised: 10 Jul 2019

See all articles by Dan Svantesson

Dan Svantesson

Bond University - School of Law

Date Written: June 14, 2019

Abstract

On 4th of June 2019, Advocate General Szpunar delivered his Opinion in Case C-18/18 between Eva Glawischnig-Piesczek (an Austrian politician) and Facebook Ireland Limited. The politician had sought to have certain current and future content – argued to be defamatory – blocked by Facebook with worldwide effect. This is arguably the most important Internet speech-related case currently before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and will doubtlessly influence court reasoning far beyond Europe.

This Comment analyses AG Szpunar’s interesting, but problematic, Opinion with particular emphasis on his reasoning in relation to the question of scope of jurisdiction; that is, what is the appropriate geographical scope of orders in these circumstances, rendered by a court that has personal jurisdiction and subject matter jurisdiction.

Keywords: Internet jurisdiction, scope of jurisdiction, Internet, EU law, Internet intermediaries, content blocking

Suggested Citation

Svantesson, Dan, Grading AG Szpunar’s Opinion in Case C-18/18 – A Caution Against Worldwide Content Blocking As Default (June 14, 2019). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3404385 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3404385

Dan Svantesson (Contact Author)

Bond University - School of Law ( email )

Gold Coast, QLD 4229
Australia

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
63
Abstract Views
377
rank
347,948
PlumX Metrics