Hageseth's principle of extraterritorial jurisdiction and international telemedicine

Abstract

At what point does an international telemedicine transaction create a sufficient commercial nexus to allow one country the authority to impose its laws on a foreign telemedicine providers? Some light on this matter was shed by the US case of Hageseth versus Superior Court. The authority for extraterritorial jurisdiction is found in the US Constitution, which requires the states to cooperate in matters of law enforcement. Similar cooperation from foreign nations cannot be expected. Unless a defendant is charged with a capital offence, nations are rarely willing to extradite their citizens. As the unlicensed practice of medicine is not a capital offence, it is unlikely that an unlicensed telemedicine provider would be extradited to the US. Because low-volume unlicensed offshore telemedicine providers are unlikely to be extradited or to be subject to trade sanctions, they may be able to operate beyond the law.