The High Court allowed Dun and Bradstreet’s appeal in a dispute over an online credit report, finding that the evidence did not establish publication in Ireland for the purposes of the applicant’s claim.
CSI Manufacturing Limited had appealed from the Circuit Court, seeking declarations and other relief under the Defamation Act 2009 over statements it said questioned its creditworthiness. It also sought orders requiring a correction and prohibiting further publication. The judgment addressed a preliminary question of jurisdiction; it did not determine whether the statements were false or defamatory.
The report was placed online on 15 May 2012 on a subscription website. The evidence identified access by Thales Limited, based in Belfast. The High Court said the information was restricted to subscribers and that there was no evidence it had been accessed by subscribers in Ireland. The applicant’s premises were in Ballymount, Dublin 22, and the judgment described it as an Irish company.
The respondent argued that the statutory publication requirement had not been met and that the court lacked jurisdiction. The judgment considered Irish and European decisions on online publication, including the Supreme Court’s Coleman decision and the European Court of Justice’s Martinez and Shevill rulings. It said the centre-of-interests approach could be considered only after publication in Ireland had been established. Mere availability to Irish subscribers did not prove access there.
The court concluded that the only proven access was by the Belfast subscriber and that publication satisfying section 28 of the 2009 Act had not been shown. It therefore allowed the respondent’s appeal. The judgment does not record a ruling on the underlying defamation allegation or specify a separate order striking out the proceedings or setting aside service.