Publication: Competencia judicial internacional y actividades ilícitas en línea (Sentencia del Tribunal de Justicia de 21 de diciembre de 2021, asunto C-251/20)
Loading...
Official URL
Full text at PDC
Publication Date
2022
Authors
Advisors (or tutors)
Editors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Citations
Exportar
Abstract
Análisis de la sentencia en el asunto Gtflix Tv, en la que el Tribunal de Justicia ha venido a confirmar su jurisprudencia previa acerca del lugar de manifestación del daño como criterio atributivo de competencia respecto de demandas relativas a la difusión de contenidos ilícitos en línea. El mantenimiento del llamado criterio del mosaico, pese a las críticas que ha recibido, se valora positivamente. Por el contrario, una valoración más crítica merece la insistencia del Tribunal en considerar en todo caso suficiente la mera accesibilidad en el foro de los contenidos difundidos a través de Internet como elemento determinante para la atribución de competencia con base en el artículo 7.2 del Reglamento 1215/2012.
This contribution discusses the judgment of the Court of Justice in Gtflix Tv. The Court of Justice has confirmed its previous case law on the place of the damage as a jurisdiction ground in respect of claims relating to the dissemination of illegal content online. The maintenance of the so-called mosaic criterion, despite the criticism it has received, is positively valued. On the contrary, the Court's insistence on considering the mere accessibility in the forum of the contents disseminated through the Internet as a decisive element for the attribution of jurisdiction deserves a more critical assessment.
This contribution discusses the judgment of the Court of Justice in Gtflix Tv. The Court of Justice has confirmed its previous case law on the place of the damage as a jurisdiction ground in respect of claims relating to the dissemination of illegal content online. The maintenance of the so-called mosaic criterion, despite the criticism it has received, is positively valued. On the contrary, the Court's insistence on considering the mere accessibility in the forum of the contents disseminated through the Internet as a decisive element for the attribution of jurisdiction deserves a more critical assessment.