BRADFORD SCHOLARS

    • Sign in
    View Item 
    •   Bradford Scholars
    • University of Bradford eTheses
    • Theses
    • View Item
    •   Bradford Scholars
    • University of Bradford eTheses
    • Theses
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

    All of Bradford ScholarsCommunitiesAuthorsTitlesSubjectsPublication DateThis CollectionAuthorsTitlesSubjectsPublication Date

    My Account

    Sign in

    HELP

    Bradford Scholars FAQsCopyright Fact SheetPolicies Fact SheetDeposit Terms and ConditionsDigital Preservation Policy

    Statistics

    Most Popular ItemsStatistics by CountryMost Popular Authors

    Does Cyberspace outdate Jurisdictional Defamation Laws?

    • CSV
    • RefMan
    • EndNote
    • BibTex
    • RefWorks
    Thumbnail
    View/Open
    Usman, m.pdf (3.093Mb)
    Download
    Author
    Usman, Muhammad
    Keyword
    Cyberspace regulation
    Internet jurisdiction
    Choice of law
    Defamation in social media
    Libel
    Private international law
    Foreign defendant
    Civil procedure rules
    The Defamation Act 2013
    Rights
    Creative Commons License
    The University of Bradford theses are licenced under a Creative Commons Licence.
    Institution
    University of Bradford
    Department
    Faculty of Management, Law and Social Sciences
    Awarded
    2019
    
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    Cyberspace produces friction when the law is implemented by domestic courts using 'state-laws'. These laws are based on a ‘physical presence’ of an individual within the territory. It elevates conflicts relating to cyberspace jurisdiction. This research examines private international law complications associated with cyberspace. The paradigm of libel that takes place within the domain of social media is used to evaluate the utility of traditional laws. This research is conducted using ‘black-letter’ methodology, keeping in mind the changes constituted by the Defamation Act 2013. It pinpoints that the instantaneous nature of social media communication demands an unambiguous exercise of 'personal-jurisdiction', beyond the doctrine of territoriality. An innovation to the code of Civil Procedure is recommended to revise the process of service for non-EU defendants. The permission to serve a writ via social networks (or to the relevant Embassy of the defendant’s domicile state), can accelerate the traditional judicial process. This thesis can be utilised as a roadmap by libel victims for preliminary information. It contributes to the knowledge by discovering that the thresholds under Section 1 and Section 9 of the Defamation Act 2013 overlap with the conventional ‘forum-conveniens’ tests. This crossover is causing legal uncertainty in the application of existing rules to the digital libel proceedings. Section 1 and Section 9 thresholds do not fulfil the purpose of eliminating ‘libel-tourism’ and maintaining a balance between speech freedom and reputation rights. They raised the bar for potential victims and restricted their rights to justice. It is proposed that the traditional ‘conveniens test’ must be used for social media libel victims to produce legal certainty in cyberspace defamation.
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/10454/17461
    Type
    Thesis
    Qualification name
    PhD
    Collections
    Theses

    entitlement

     
    DSpace software (copyright © 2002 - 2022)  DuraSpace
    Quick Guide | Contact Us
    Open Repository is a service operated by 
    Atmire NV
     

    Export search results

    The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

    By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

    To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

    After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.