As the Higher Regional Court of Brandenburg ruled in its judgment of 28.11.2016, the “flying jurisdiction” also applies to violations of personality rights (case reference: 1 U 6/16).
In the case of violations of personality rights on the internet, legal action can be brought at any court location throughout Germany – provided there is no direct regional connection.
Violation of personality rights through links
The managing director of a commercially active company sued the administrator of a domain (Admin-C) who worked for an Internet company.
The reason for the lawsuit was that when the managing director’s name was entered into a search engine, links to pages were displayed in which the managing director was described as a “criminal”.
In addition, explicit warnings were issued against doing business with him.
The managing director therefore requested the deletion of the entries and the omission of new links to infringing statements.
When applying to have the action dismissed, Admin-C argued that the court of first instance was not locally admissible.
Applicability of the “flying jurisdiction” in the case of personality violations on the internet
The appeal judgment of the Higher Regional Court of Brandenburg ruled in favor of the managing director with regard to the local jurisdiction of the Regional Court of Potsdam.
§ Section 32 ZPO is not necessarily to be interpreted narrowly.
This is because in the case of an infringement on the internet, the place of success of the asserted unlawful act and thus also the place of commission of the act is everywhere; thus also in the district of the Potsdam Regional Court.
Equating infringements of personality rights on the Internet and in print products
The rules on the applicable jurisdiction for press products as well as radio and television broadcasts have been generally recognized to date.
However, it has sometimes been disputed whether these regulations also apply to criminal statements on the internet.
In the “New York Times” decision (judgment of March 2, 2010 – VI ZR 23/09), the BGH ruled that press products are not regularly distributed, but only made available.
An action is therefore only locally admissible where a conflict of interest would be likely.
No application of the flying jurisdiction if there is a strong regional connection
In contrast, the Higher Regional Court of Brandenburg has now ruled that infringements of personality rights on the internet have no regional connection.
At least as long as they are not only committed on regionally active websites.
Knowledge of the infringing statement was therefore “equally likely at any location in the Federal Republic”. A reference to the area of jurisdiction of the Potsdam Regional Court is irrelevant.
At the same time, the choice of court is also compatible with the plaintiff’s right of choice pursuant to Section 35 ZPO and is not an abuse of rights.
Such an abuse of rights would only exist if the choice of court would result in an excessive advantage for the plaintiff.
The decision of the Higher Regional Court of Brandenburg is groundbreaking.
It clearly states that violations of personality rights on the internet have a nationwide effect, provided that they are not only expressed on regionally active websites.
This means that in most cases, the rules on the floating place of jurisdiction apply and the plaintiff can choose the court in which he wishes to sue.
