Today, with the advancement of communication, defamation claims have crossed the national borders, it is possible for several foreign elements to be involved in a claim. In this situation, several courts may apply jurisdiction based on their relationship with those elements. This issue is problematic where there is a little connection between those elements and the jurisdiction. Therefore, legal systems must provide jurisdictional rules that prevent such a challenge. In this research, it will be investigated what jurisdictional criteria are used by the legal systems of Iran, England and the European Union in these claims. Can these rules meet the legitimate expectations of private individuals and at the same time have the necessary flexibility in view of the evolution of technology? In the English legal system, the legislators have adopted special rules for defamation which provides that, the courts can hear the lawsuit if England is the most appropriate place to file that claim. therefore, the English courts should examine the connection of the lawsuit with other jurisdictions. In the European Union, in addition to the general rule of the defendant's place of residence, the place of damage where the defamation was published also has jurisdiction. In EU law, the center of the victim’s interests will be competent in internet defamation. However, there are no specific rules for defamation in Iranian law, and the general jurisdiction rules will be applicable in the case of defamation. This Iranian approach is ineffective for defamation and will cause difficulties for litigants.