While negligence disputes are within the scope of the Rome II
proposal, a provision on defamation was dropped during negotiations
that have run since 2003. Now Diana Wallis, a former litigator, is
lobbying to get it back in.
Wallis, a Liberal Democrat, is the European Parliament's
Rapporteur on Rome II. She told EUobserver.com: "With so many
articles being published on the web I am concerned that we will get
into a situation where ordinary people will find themselves facing
legal confusion."
The Rome II Regulation aims to achieve legal clarity when the
laws of two EU member states conflict and no contract provides a
resolution. Its provision on cross border defamation cases was
dropped because it proved to be too controversial.
The original proposal was that the law which should govern a
case should be that of the country where the person who claimed to
have been defamed lived. Media organisations objected, saying that
any publisher would need to know the defamation laws of all member
states in order to publish any article.
Wallis wants the Rome II Regulation to deal with defamation, but
wants the applicable law to be that of the country in which the
article is published, so that publishers only have to consider one
set of defamation laws.
The European Parliament's legal affairs committee will decide
whether to back the re-adoption of a defamation rule, and that vote
is expected to take place in December.
"This is an area of great concern," says a statement on Wallis's
web site. "Following a decision by the Commission to withdraw
defamation from the scope of the Regulation, the issue has been
relegated to the general review clause, which will not occur before
another four years. Clearly, this issue will continue to haunt us
and the European Parliament should at least have the opportunity to
reconsider the stance it took with an overwhelming majority at
first reading."
