In determining the questions of jurisdiction and choice of law in defamation cases,Australian law focuses on the location of ‘publication’. Such an approach is associatedwith the risk of an unsuitably wide reach of Australian jurisdiction and laws. Through the application of a six‐step model, outlining the sequence of eventspotentially resulting in harm in cases of defamation, this article examines thepossibility of focusing on some other location. Advantages and disadvantages of eachidentified step are discussed. The conclusion reached is that, despite the problemsassociated with the Australian approach, no better focal point exists. However, thearticle also concludes that there is a range of avenues for addressing and minimisingthe problems associated with the Australian approach.
|Number of pages||32|
|Journal||Bond Law Review|
|Publication status||Published - 2005|