TripAdvisor was sued by Viaticum for denigration and parasitism and challenged the jurisdiction of the Paris Commercial Court:

• Primarily because its terms and conditions of use stipulated that "the domestic law of the State of Massachusetts made it possible to determine the court with special jurisdiction".
• In the alternative, because the Paris judicial court had exclusive jurisdiction in disputes relating to the law of 29 July 1881 on freedom of the press

In its ruling dated 27 April 2020, the Commercial Court rejected TripAdvisor's claims and declared itself competent, a ruling which TripAdvisor has appealed.

By a judgment of 6 January 2021the Paris Court of Appeal upheld the Commercial Court's ruling:

• Insofar as it declared null and void the jurisdiction clause in TripAdvisor's GCU. Under Article 46 of the French Code of Civil Procedure, Viaticum was free to bring its action before the court for the place where the damage was suffered. In this case, as the acts of disparagement and parasitism were suffered at the company's registered office in France, Viaticum was entitled to bring the case before the French courts.
• In so far as it held that the Commercial Court had jurisdiction. As Viaticum's claims related to acts of disparagement and parasitism rather than defamation, the provisions of the Law of 29 July 1881 on freedom of the press did not apply.

It also ordered Tripadvisor to pay Viaticum €7,000 under Article 700 of the French Code of Civil Procedure and to pay the costs.