CNN fails in appeal against Ganley defamation case being heard in Ireland

Declan Ganley and Rivada claim they were 'maliciously' defamed in the story broadcast and published on the internet on October 20, 2020. File picture: Peter Muhly/Getty Images

The Court of Appeal (CoA) has dismissed an appeal by CNN over a decision that a defamation action by Galway-based businessman Declan Ganley and his Rivada telecommunications firm against the international news broadcaster should be heard in Ireland.

Last year, the High Court ruled the proceedings by Mr Ganley and Rivada should be heard in Ireland and not the US, as the CNN defendants had argued.

Ganley/Rivada has sued Atlanta registered CNN Inc and two associated companies, Cable News International (CNI) Ltd, and Turner Broadcasting System Europe Ltd, both London registered.

The action is over a report suggesting the first Trump administration pressured the Department of Defence to award a multi-million contract without a competition for the lease of mid-band spectrum to an entity described in the news story as “Rivada”.

Mr Ganley and Rivada claim they were "maliciously" defamed in the story broadcast and published on the internet on October 20, 2020.

The defendants deny defamation and say the story is, in substance, true, and relates to a matter of public interest. This is a defence which they say is available in such cases both in Ireland and the US.

In claiming the US is the appropriate jurisdiction, the defendants argued, among other things, that the report was fundamentally related to the US and not Ireland and that all the relevant witnesses are based in the US.

Mr Ganley argued, among other things, that he and Rivada Ireland are synonymous with the US parent company and Rivada Networks LLC. This was clear from the re-publications in Irish newspapers which immediately made the connection between the offending publications and Mr Ganley and Rivada Ireland, it was argued.

Appeals dismissed

In a judgment on behalf of the three-judge CoA on Friday, Mr Justice Denis McDonald dismissed two appeals by the CNN side.

The first related to the High Court's refusal of the defendants' application setting aside service of the proceedings outside this jurisdiction on the ground that Ireland was not the appropriate forum for the hearing of this litigation.

Weighing all the factors raised by the parties in this case, the judge said he came to the conclusion that Ireland is clearly and distinctly the more appropriate forum for the hearing and determination of the plaintiffs’ claims against the defendants.

This was, in his view, irrespective of who bears the burden of proof on the issue. The most significant factor in play is the fact that publication occurred in this jurisdiction and that the plaintiffs claim that their reputation was damaged here.

He also dismissed a second appeal in which the London-registered CNI and Turner defendants sought a dismissal of the case against them for disclosing no reasonable cause of action or on the grounds that the claims made against them were bound to fail.

The judge said while the defendants suggested there was no evidence at all to support the Ganley/Rivada case as to involvement by CNI and Turner in the publications, the position, even on their own evidence, was by no means clear cut, he said.

In so far as CNI was concerned, CNN had acknowledged that employees of CNI, on occasion, create content, he said.

Similarly, CNN conceded that CNI was engaged in news production and news-gathering activities.

He concluded that the appeal in relation to CNI/Turner should also be dismissed. He said it was not clear at this stage of the proceedings that the claims against them were bound to fail.