Legal policy analysis proposes jurisdictional standards for cross-border cyber disputes in Ghana, highlighting mechanisms to balance victim protection with foreign actor fairness.
This paper examines the challenges of determining civil jurisdiction in cyberspace and proposes policy guidelines for developing a Ghanaian legal framework. Drawing primarily from the principles established in eDate Advertising GmbH v X and Martinez v MGN Ltd, it considers how concepts such as the centre of interests, purposeful availment, minimum contacts, website targeting, consumer protection, defamation, and choice-of-court agreements can be adapted to cross-border online disputes. The paper draws on comparative jurisprudence and international frameworks, including the Brussels I Recast Regulation, Budapest Convention and Malabo Convention. It ultimately seeks to establish a predictable and balanced approach that protects individuals and businesses from cross-border cyber harms without imposing unreasonable jurisdiction on foreign actors.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Joshua Nii Nortey Quarcoo (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: