Cathal Byrne (Fine Gael)

I thank the Minister for being here with us this evening.

I also briefly want to speak on this section 34A and I have several questions which I would be interested in hearing the Minister's contribution on. Similar to some of the earlier points raised on section 34A, at the very beginning it says this protection is against strategic lawsuits against public participation, which we all understand and which is important is incorporated into our laws here in Ireland and that there is clarity brought to the situation which we all know currently exists. However, regarding the definition, where it says that this "means defamation proceedings or part thereof that pursue unfounded claims" and the specific wording there, does that mean at the very beginning of a court case involving defamation, there will need to be an interim hearing to ascertain whether this is an unfounded claim? How is this going to operate in practice?

If it is the case that the barrier and threshold that have to be met in order to rely on this section are that you first must show that you have either a founded claim or an unfounded claim, as the case maybe, depending on which side you are operating on, is that not just creating another procedural threshold that must be first met before this case can continue? Second, in respect of paragraph (d), which has been much discussed, on the question of fraudulent or abusive forum shopping, surely if the case has already made its way into the court, the courts have decided this particular court is the right forum for this case to be heard? Then, in and of itself, it is not possible to argue there is fraudulent or abusive forum shopping taking place because, by the very fact the case has made its way into the court as a forum, inherently that has to be the forum. How is that going to operate in practice? At present, we have a very clear set of rules around which forum a case can be brought to. They are well laid out, much litigated and there is plenty of precedence that can be relied on, but how in practice is that definition of "such as, delaying proceedings, fraudulent or abusive forum shopping" going to make its way through the system?

Is it envisaged there will be further amendments brought into this whole area of forum shopping that were perhaps envisaged when the defamation report was first considered but have not made their way through into this Bill? For instance, if I am somebody who feels I have been defamed by a publication which predominantly is based overseas and which might have a small readership in Ireland but, because of the nature of our laws around defamation, I choose to take the case here in Ireland, is that whole area discussed in the defamation report likely to be incorporated in the future?