Recent years have witnessed considerable controversy over the principles that determine when a court has jurisdiction to hear claims against foreign publishers who circulate defamatory material in several jurisdictions, including England. This is the situation that arose in the recent decision of the House of Lords in Berezovsky v. Michaels [2000] 1 W.L.R. 1004. In 1996 Forbes Magazine, a company incorporated in the United States, published an article about certain activities in Russia of two prominent businessmen, Mr. Berezovsky and Mr. Glouchkov, who were resident in Russia. The magazine containing the article was primarily circulated in the United States, but did have an English circulation accounting for approximately 0.2% of its global circulation. In 1997 Mr. Berezovsky and Mr. Glouchkov issued proceedings in England alleging that the article contained defamatory material. The claimants, however, limited their claims to the damage done to their reputations in England as a result of the magazine’s English publication. The issue before the House of Lords was whether the claimants should be given permission to serve their claim form on the publisher out of the jurisdiction, pursuant to R.S.C. Order 11, rule 1(l)(f), now C.P.R Part 6.20(8). At first instance Popplewell J. had refused such permission, but had subsequently been overturned by the Court of Appeal ([1999] E.M.L.R. 278: judgment of the court delivered by Hirst L.J.). The House of Lords by a majority (Lords Hoffmann and Hope dissenting) dismissed the appeal and held that permission should be given for the trial of the action to proceed in England.