Novell, Inc., in which the court stated that when "[f]aced with two seemingly equally strong inferences, one favoring the plaintiff and one favoring the defendant, it is inappropriate for us to make a determination as to which inference will ultimately prevail, lest we invade the traditional role of the factfinder. [read post]

Nor does it impose a US style single publication rule, as Geoffrey Robertson QC has suggested in a number of cases, nor does it change the rules established in The Spiliada [1987] AC 470, as to when England is an appropriate forum (basically, nearly always:-)But it does provide an alternative route by which to argue, sensibly, that the English courts should not be involved in cases where the circulation of the libelous item in England has been tiny, and the damages in England are… [read post]