3 ms·
>Even though the ruling occurred in a U.S. federal court, Judge Tse said he made the ruling based on New Zealand law, as Zuru intends to sue in that jurisdictio
by unethical_ban 4y ago
>Even though the ruling occurred in a U.S. federal court, Judge Tse said he made the ruling based on New Zealand law, as Zuru intends to sue in that jurisdiction. Therefore, the court's ruling was decided based on New Zealand law's definition of defamation, and not the U.S. legal definition.
If Glassdoor and the anonymous review doesn't violate US law, then shouldn't the US judge butt out of it? Wouldn't a NZ judge order Glassdoor to turn over the data? Who mediates claims between parties from different countries?
- eru 4y ago> Who mediates claims between parties from different countries? That's a completely question in general with different answers depending on context. For example, it matters whether it's a criminal case or a civil case. If there's a contractual relationship between the affected parties, the contract often specifies this. For defamation, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation might be a good start.
- bragr 4y agoIANAL but I suspect this is likely down to the details of the mutual legal assistance treaty between the US and NZ, e.g. the result of the US courts processing a foreign subpoena. Interestingly New Zealand doesn't appear to be a member of the Hague convention so I'm unsure how this is supposed to work in this case. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hague_Service_Convention https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hague_Service_Convention
- snapetom 4y agoYeah, I'd love to hear a lawyer's opinion on this. Seems to open a door for an appeal if a US judge is applying foreign definitions and litmus tests to US companies/citizens. At the very least, there are nuances that judges will not pick up when evaluating foreign law.