Mondo Inc v. KRIK
Prosecutor
Mondo Inc
Company
2024 | Litigation procedure
The publisher of Kurir, Mondo INC, sued KRIK for the third time for the same reason. Namely, the publisher of Kurir regularly files lawsuits against KRIK because Raskrikavanje (KRIK’s portal) publishes a regular analysis of the front pages of domestic media every year. Raskrinkavanje publishes an analysis of the number of fake news on the front pages of domestic print media, and Kurir has been among the record holders in this field for years. The publisher of Kurir sued KRIK for the third time in 2024 after Raskrikavanje published an analysis that found that Kurir published at least 56 unfounded, biased or manipulative news stories on its front pages in 2023. In addition to KRIK, Mondo Inc filed a lawsuit against several other media outlets that reported the analysis (and they also do this every year). In the lawsuit submitted to the Commercial Court in Belgrade, Kurir claimed that incorrect information was published in the analysis and that their business reputation was damaged and that damage was caused to them. They asked the court to determine that KRIK is unfair competition and that the court order KRIK to pay 11 million dinars to the publisher of Kurir. In the lawsuit, however, they did not specify which information in the text was allegedly incorrect.
Basis of submission (according to which article of the law):
Article 41 of the Trade LawDamages/penalty requested:
The publisher of Kurir demanded that they be paid 11,000,000 dinars.
Defendant
KRIK (Media)
Organization/Media
KRIK
Sector
Public information
Outcome - In progress
Judge Ana Novaković rejected the lawsuit as unfounded. In the verdict, she stated that in this case there can be no talk of unfair competition since KRIK is a media, that is, it deals with public information, and that area is regulated by another law – the Law on Public Information and Media. The verdict is of first instance and Kurir can appeal against it.
Present characteristics
1. With the lawsuit that initiated the procedure, the plaintiff uses an imbalance of power, such as his financial advantage, political/social influence or authority as a power holder, in which way he puts pressure on the defendant – an actor participating in the public debate.
The plaintiff is a powerful company that publishes pro-regime media with close ties to the top of the government.
2. The arguments presented by the prosecutor are partially or completely unfounded.
In the lawsuit, the publisher of Kurir did not specify which information in the analysis was allegedly incorrect.
3. The lawsuit or legal remedy, that is, the request or proposal submitted by the plaintiff is disproportionate, excessive or unreasonable.
The plaintiff demands that KRIK pay them an incredible sum of 11,000,000 dinars, which would irrevocably prevent the existence of this research portal.
4. The lawsuit is accompanied by an offensive public relations campaign designed to harass, discredit or intimidate actors participating in the public debate, or is intended to divert attention from the substantive issue at hand.
Kurir is known for regularly targeting critics of the current regime, among other things, for targeting KRIK and journalists from this media.
5. The plaintiff, or persons associated with the plaintiff, have participated or are currently participating in intimidating, harassing, or threatening actors involved in the public debate.
Smear campaigns against participants in the public debate and critics of the current regime are regular in the tabloid of which the plaintiff is the publisher.
6. The plaintiff, or persons associated with the plaintiff, have previously been or are currently involved in multiple coordinated lawsuits filed against participants in the public debate.
This is the third identical lawsuit that Mondo Inc. files against KRIK, but also against other media that publish the analysis of the Raskrinkavanje. Almost identical lawsuits were filed in 2022 for the same reason – because Raskrikanje published an analysis of the front pages. So far, one procedure has been legally concluded in favor of KRIK.
Additional materials
