What to do if you are subjected to false allegations of sexual assault on Instagram

One major issue that has become increasingly common is the rise of false allegations of sexual assault on Instagram. While the platform has been a powerful tool for genuine victims to share their stories and seek support, it has also been used by individuals to make unfounded claims of sexual assault against others. These false accusations can have devastating consequences for both the accused and the credibility of genuine victims.

Furthermore, the ease of sharing information on Instagram means that these allegations can quickly go viral, causing irreparable damage to a person's reputation. As such, it is crucial to address this issue and understand the impact of false accusations on both the accused and the larger community. In this article, we will delve into the prevalence of false allegations of sexual assault on Instagram, the potential motivations behind them, and the steps that can be taken to combat this troubling trend.

How to overcome online defamation and restore your reputation

If you’re struggling to remove defamatory content posted about you online, or are seeking legal help regarding this issue, read the following case study to grasp how our firm cam help you.

Defamation during a demonstration

In this article, we look at a special case where a newspaper journalist from outside the UK is accused of defamation. Defamation means saying or writing something false about someone that harms their reputation. This case study shows how tricky it can be to take legal action in the UK against a newspaper that's based in another country. We'll talk about the different challenges, like dealing with laws from different places and figuring out which country's courts can make decisions. This situation gets even more complicated because of how easily news can spread across the world online.

How to remove a publication of professional disciplinary hearing from Google

Defamation by innuendo in the digital age

Defamation by innuendo refers to misleading implications in statements that can subtly damage a person's reputation without making direct accusations. The vast and rapid spread of information online, coupled with a tendency for sensationalism, makes such indirect defamation particularly harmful on the internet. Essentially, it's like whispering rumors, but on a global scale, where insinuations can be mistaken for truths.

False allegations of sexual assault on social media

In this libel defamation case, Yair Cohen and Filiz Kiani of Cohen Davis Solicitorsrepresented Jack Aaronson, also known as Dominic Ford, where he took Marcus Stones, popularly known as Mickey Taylor to court. The case, presided over by Mr Justice Julian Knowles at the Royal Courts of Justice in London, shed light on the power of social media and the consequences of false accusations. Let's delve into the facts of the case and the judge's ruling.

How to manage online reputation after false allegations

There are few things in life more frustrating than someone who is falsely accused, then goes through a criminal trial, found not guilty and then having to live for decades with news articles that highlight the false allegations. This case study shows how false allegations can strike like lightning, instantly darkening the clear skies of one's personal or professional reputation. This challenge is intensified by search algorithms that may unwittingly prioritise salacious or controversial content, further embedding damaging narratives.

What to do if you are falsely accused of rape

Case study of defamatory, out of context news articles

When a newspaper article is extracted from its original context, it has the potential to be manipulated to convey a defamatory message. This manipulation can occur either intentionally or unintentionally and may result in adverse consequences for the individuals involved. In such instances, it becomes crucial to contemplate the ramifications of distorting a statement's context, as it can be employed to unjustly depict someone or an event in a negative manner. Furthermore, it is essential to uphold the principle that individuals possess the right to have their words and actions accurately represented. If an individual believes that a newspaper article has been taken out of context, resulting in a defamatory interpretation, they may have legal options available to challenge the inaccuracies in the news report.

How can a business defend itself against defamation online

What happens when a business is being defamed online? Can anything be done about it or free speech is king? The following case study gives some answers to these questions by considering a typical situation of online defamation which small and medium size business often face.

Anonymous Internet defamation: what to do

The challenge of addressing online defamation is exacerbated when the perpetrator hides behind the veil of anonymity. However, with the evolving digital landscape, there are systematic measures and legal tools that can help unveil the identity of such defamers and protect the reputation of the aggrieved party. Here's an overview of what to do when confronted with anonymous internet defamation.

Table of content

How to utilise public resources for identification of online defamers

Digital footprint analysis to expose defamers

How to obtain disclosure orders and subpoenas to expose defamers 

When and how to get defamation injunctions

How to utilise public resources for identification of online defamers

Our initial strategy involves scouring publicly accessible resources to pinpoint potential identifiers of the defamer. This might include looking into digital footprints, metadata, or even patterns in the content that might hint at the identity. When confronted with the challenge of anonymous online defamation, having an experienced team at your side can make all the difference. Over the years, we have fine-tuned our strategies and leveraged cutting-edge technologies to identify anonymous defamers and protect the reputations of our clients. Here's a deeper look into our expertise and the nuanced approach we employ in this specialized field. Years of handling numerous cases have honed our ability to expertly navigate a myriad of publicly available resources. These databases, forums, and platforms often contain a wealth of information that, when analysed correctly, can lead directly or indirectly to the defamer.

Digital footprint analysis to expose defamers

Everyone leaves a trace online, and our team is adept at reading and interpreting these digital breadcrumbs. Whether it's a specific style of writing, the timing of posts, or the kind of platforms used, we can identify patterns that help pinpoint an individual or, at the very least, narrow down the pool of potential suspects. Often overlooked, metadata — the data about data — can be a goldmine of information. Every digital interaction, be it a photo upload, a comment, or a blog post, comes embedded with metadata. This can include timestamps, device information, location details, and more. Our team has the tools and know-how to extract and interpret this data, often revealing crucial clues about the defamer's identity.

Content Pattern Recognition

Beyond the digital data, the content itself can offer significant insights. Our team includes experts trained in content analysis. They can detect nuances, writing styles, recurring themes, or specific terminologies used by the defamer, which can hint at their background, motivations, or identity. What sets us apart is our collaborative approach. We combine the expertise of IT professionals, content analysts, and legal experts to provide a comprehensive solution. This synergy ensures that while our tech team delves into the digital aspects, our legal team is ready to act on the information obtained.

Collaborative suspect identification

While we harness technological methods, understanding the context and any potential motivations is crucial. We'll engage in a collaborative discussion with you to identify any potential suspects based on the nature and content of the defamation. In the maze of digital anonymity, successfully unmasking online defamers often requires more than just technological expertise. One of the most potent tools at our disposal is collaboration.

By joining forces with those affected by defamation, we amplify our chances of uncovering the identity of the perpetrator. Let's delve deeper into our collaborative suspect identification process. Though we employ state-of-the-art technological methods, they serve as just one part of our comprehensive approach.

Real insights often come from blending machine-driven data with human perspectives. By understanding the personal or business context surrounding the defamation, we can refine our search parameters and make our identification processes more precise. At the heart of our collaborative approach are personalised consultation sessions with our clients. These dialogues provide:

• • Background Information: Understanding any past conflicts, competitors, or disgruntled individuals can offer context.
• • Specific Incidents: Pinpointing any recent events or changes that might have triggered the defamation helps narrow down the timeline and, potentially, the pool of suspects.
• • Tone & Style: Is the tone personal, hinting at someone with a personal grudge? Or does it sound more professional, suggesting a competitor or someone from within the industry?
• • Inside Information: Does the content have details that only certain individuals would know? This can be instrumental in zeroing in on a narrow group of suspects.

Understanding the 'why' can often lead us to the 'who'. By discussing potential motivations behind the defamation with our clients, we can develop theories about the defamer's objectives, be it financial gain, personal vendetta, business rivalry, or mere mischief.

Beyond formal consultation sessions, we believe in the power of collaborative brainstorming. By bringing together our team of experts and the insights provided by the client, we foster an environment of creative problem-solving. Such sessions often lead to unexpected breakthroughs in suspect identification.

How to obtain disclosure orders and subpoenas

If preliminary efforts don't yield a definitive identification, we resort to more forceful legal tools:

• Disclosure Orders: These compel online platforms, be it website operators, email providers, or social media platforms, to disclose any relevant information they have about the defamer's identity.
• Subpoenas: A legal demand for information or testimony against a party, it obligates service providers to share information about anonymous users. Sometimes, even with our best efforts, the identity of the person spreading harmful information about you online remains hidden. When that happens, we rely on stronger legal methods, like Disclosure Orders and Subpoenas, to help reveal the person responsible.

A Disclosure Order is like an official request from the court, which we can give to companies like Facebook, Twitter, Google, or even your email provider. This request tells them they need to share any information they have that could help us figure out who is defaming you online. This can include things like usernames, IP addresses (a unique address that identifies a device on the internet), or when and where they logged in.

A subpoena is another kind of request from the court, but usually from a court in the US or Canada. When we give a subpoena to a company or a person, they must provide the information we ask for, or they could get into trouble with the court. This can help us get information about the anonymous person causing you trouble. In simple terms, Disclosure Orders and Subpoenas are powerful tools we can use when we need more help finding the anonymous person defaming you online. Think of them like keys that can unlock doors and give us access to the information we need to protect your reputation.

When and how to get defamation injunctions

When faced with particularly elusive defamers who skilfully hide their tracks online, we are not deterred. Our commitment to safeguarding your reputation remains unwavering, and in such challenging circumstances, we seek the assistance of the judiciary, which can be a game-changer. Let's explore the steps we take when moving things into the legal arena. An injunction is a legal tool that prohibits or commands certain actions. When we ask the court for an injunction against an anonymous online user:

• It serves as a direct message to the defamer, urging them to halt their damaging actions.
• Beyond the individual, it acts as a strong deterrent to others who might consider engaging in such malicious behaviour, sending a clear signal that consequences await those who spread false information online.

Merely obtaining an injunction isn't enough; its effectiveness lies in how and where it's enforced:

• Targeting the source: The platform where the defamatory content is hosted, whether it's a blog, forum, or social media site, will be directly served with the injunction. This obligates them to take prompt action, usually resulting in the removal or deactivation of the harmful content. 
• Engaging search engines: We go a step further by serving the injunction to major search engines like Google, Bing, and Yahoo. This ensures that even if, for some reason, the content remains online, it doesn't show up when someone searches for your name or business. Essentially, it becomes like a tree falling in an empty forest; if no one sees it, it minimises the damage.

While we always hope to resolve defamation issues without resorting to the courts, our priority is to protect your reputation by any means necessary. In those rare instances where traditional methods don't yield results, legal injunctions become our shield and sword, helping us ensure that harmful content is quelled and your reputation remains untarnished.

Can you be prosecuted for defamation?

In the UK, while defamation itself doesn't lead to criminal prosecution, certain circumstances surrounding a defamation incident might still involve the criminal courts.

Table of content:

Is defamation a civil or a criminal in the UK

What is the difference between defamation and harassment

Can you take someone to court for defamation and harassment at the same time

Can you user a criminal conviction of harassment in a civil defamation case

Why is the case of Paul Britton and Origin Design significant

Is defamation a civil or a criminal in the UK

In the UK, defamation is only considered a civil wrongdoing. Defamation being treated as a civil wrongdoing means that the matter is primarily resolved through civil litigation, where the injured party (the person whose reputation was harmed) can initiate a civil lawsuit against the alleged defamer (the person who made the false statement). However, if the defamation also includes elements of harassment, as was the case in the case of the web developer Paul Britton and his company Origin Design who harassed and defamed one of their customers with whom they had a financial dispute, it is possible to bring a successful criminal prosecution for harassment first, and then follow it through with a successful claim for defamation.

What is the difference between defamation and harassment

Defamation and harassment are two distinct legal issues, and their definitions and consequences differ. Defamation typically concerns itself with false statements that harm a person's reputation, while harassment deals with persistent unwanted behaviour intended to cause alarm or distress. However, situations can arise where the two overlap.

Can you take someone to court for defamation and harassment at the same time?

Absolutely. In many legal jurisdictions, it's possible to take someone to court for both defamation and harassment, although the approach and strategy might differ based on the specifics of the case and the legal system in place. One critical factor to consider is the statute of limitations. For defamation claims, in many places, you have a limited window – often only 12 months – to initiate legal action from the date the defamatory statement was made or published.

Therefore, timing is of the essence when considering legal recourse. If someone has harassed you and, as part of that harassment, made defamatory statements about you, it might be strategic to first address the harassment in a criminal court. Harassment, being a course of conduct that causes alarm or distress, might be easier to prove criminally, especially if there's a pattern of behaviour or clear evidence of intent. Once you've successfully secured a conviction in the criminal court for harassment, this verdict can bolster your subsequent civil claim for defamation. The conviction serves as a potent piece of evidence, indicating the defendant's malicious intent and propensity to use falsehoods as a weapon to cause distress.

Can you use a criminal conviction of harassment in a civil defamation case

Yes, you can. A good demonstration of this is the case that our firm took against the web developer, Paul Britton, and his company, Origin Design. The Paul Britton case marked a legal milestone in the UK. It became the first instance where an online troll was held accountable for his harassing and defamatory actions on two distinct occasions: once in the realm of criminal law, and then again in the civil legal system. Paul Britton, a web developer by profession and owner of a web development company, found himself entangled in a disagreement with one of his clients, a certain Mr. Phipps.

The root of their dispute revolved around a £200 charge for a job that, according to Mr. Phipps, was not executed to the agreed-upon standards. Instead of addressing the grievance directly, Mr. Britton chose to escalate the matter by filing a suit against Mr. Phipps in the small claims court. However, this legal move was just the beginning of a series of vindictive actions. Concurrently, Britton embarked on a sinister campaign against Mr. Phipps. He created multiple bogus websites that maliciously and falsely portrayed Mr. Phipps as a paedophile. This cruel smear campaign was not only damaging to Mr. Phipps's reputation but also caused him considerable emotional distress.

Though Mr. Phipps was confident that Britton was the mastermind behind these defamatory websites, gathering concrete evidence to substantiate this belief posed a significant challenge. The police, too, found themselves at a similar impasse, unable to conclusively link Britton to the digital onslaught against Phipps. Despite these challenges, the case would eventually become a precedent-setter. Paul Britton faced justice in the criminal court for his online harassment and, once convicted, had to answer for his actions again in a separate civil case in the High Court. The outcome served as a powerful reminder about the consequences of online harassment and the significance of digital responsibility.

They were embroiled in a controversy that combined elements of both defamation and harassment. Initially, there was a financial dispute between the company and one of its customers. Instead of resolving this issue through traditional means, Britton and Origin Design took to making false statements that damaged the customer's reputation, thereby engaging in defamation. However, it didn't stop at just false claims. The actions of Brittton and his company extended beyond mere statements. They continually targeted the customer with persistent unwanted behaviour that was intended to intimidate, distress, and annoy.

This repeated troubling conduct is characteristic of harassment. Given the dual nature of their actions, it was feasible for the affected party to pursue a two-pronged legal approach. First, they could potentially initiate a criminal prosecution based on harassment. Criminal harassment charges focus on the psychological or emotional trauma and the direct harm caused by the unwanted behaviour. Once this has been addressed, the aggrieved party can then pivot towards seeking redress for the defamation, focusing on the reputational damage caused by false statements.

Why is the case of Paul Britton and Origin Design significant

The case of Britton and Origin Design is significant because it involved a double prosecution, both criminal and civil, for harassment in the UK. The case revolved around Mr. Britton, the owner of a web developing company, who had a dispute with one of his clients, Mr. Phipps, over unsatisfactory work. In retaliation, Mr. Britton created fake websites falsely accusing Mr. Phipps of being a paedophile. The significance of this case lies in the fact that Mr. Phipps' reputation was severely damaged, leading to the loss of his business and the deterioration of his mental health.

Yair Cohen, a social media lawyer, took on Mr. Phipps' case and obtained evidence that proved Mr. Britton's involvement in the harassing websites. This evidence, including an audio recording, was handed over to the police, resulting in Mr. Britton's conviction for harassment and a prison sentence. Furthermore, Yair Cohen initiated civil proceedings against Mr. Britton for harassment and defamation, which Mr. Britton lost. As a result, he had to pay substantial damages to Mr. Phipps, cover his legal costs, and provide him with an apology. This case highlights the importance of holding individuals accountable for their actions online and the potential consequences they may face in both criminal and civil courts.

This case was reported in the press

Web developer created a website about ex-client falsely claiming he was a paedophile

Web developer avoids jail after creating website about ex-client who falsely claimed he was a paedophile

Harassment victim wins libel damages

How do you stop someone from defaming you?

This case demonstrates a typical social media defamation case where with prompt action and the right legal support a case that could have lasted for years, was brought to a satisfactory outcome very promptly.

Table of content

Defamation on Twitter case

Defamation and the right to be forgotten

Twitter defamation strategies

Legal Issues in pursuing a Twitter defamation case

Lawyer’s thoughts about the case

Defamation on Twitter case

Mr Jerome, a man in his late 40s embarked on a journey to find love. In 2016, he ventured onto a dating website, donning an online persona and a pseudonym to protect his identity. His quest for connection led him to an enchanting romantic partner. Their love story began to unfold after they met on the website Plenty of Fish as they exchanged countless messages via WhatsApp, all under the cloak of his pseudonym.

As passion blossomed between the two, their relationship escalated to intimate levels. However, fate had other plans. Mr Jerome lost his mobile phone, and when he installed WhatsApp on his new device, his true identity was inadvertently revealed to his romantic partner.

This revelation led to a whirlwind of emotions, and his partner began to obsess over him, having discovered who he really was. She felt cheated that he had used a pseudonym throughout. Mr Jerome feeling exposed and overwhelmed decided to end all communication with her.

Years passed, and Mr Jerome thought he had left the turbulent past behind him. But one day, he discovered that three Twitter accounts had been created, spreading false and defamatory allegations against him. These accounts accused him of manipulation, sexual assault, catfishing, and even rape. To make matters worse, they revealed his personal details to the world, jeopardizing his privacy and reputation.

Defamation and the right to be forgotten

Mr Jerome felt harassed. Determined to fight for his rights, he got in touch with our law firm.

Our lawyers acted swiftly, submitting a right to be forgotten application to Google to delist search results containing the damaging allegations. Google complied, and Mr Jerome’s search results were cleared.

Twitter defamation strategies

To that Mr Jerome attain a permanent resolution to the matter, our solicitors served Twitter with a Norwich Pharmacal Order (NPO) application together with a request to delete the three offending accounts and obtain disclosure information. Twitter obliged by deactivating the accounts. However, a new Twitter account surfaced, posting the same malicious allegations against Mr Jerome.

Upon being notified of the new account, Twitter expressed concerns about the implications of the NPO application. They feared it might have adverse consequences for a woman claiming to have been raped by Mr Jerome. Whilst not actively opposing the application, Twitter intended to have Counsel represent themselves in the disclosure application in the High Court for the purpose of safeguarding the privacy and freedom of expression of their users.

The application for disclosure was nevertheless granted by the judge. The firm now was able to reach out to the individual in question. This paid off as the poster removed the remaining defamatory tweet. With his reputation restored and the threats neutralized, Mr Jerome finally found peace in the digital realm. This tale serves as a cautionary reminder of the importance of protecting one's online identity and privacy while navigating the unpredictable landscape of modern love.

Legal issues in pursuing a Twitter defamation case

In the above case, the lawyers faced several challenges while representing Mr Jerome and fighting to protect his privacy and reputation. Some of these challenges included:

• Legal complexities: The case involved a delicate balance between Mr Jerome's right to privacy and the freedom of expression of the individuals posting the defamatory content. Navigating these complexities required a deep understanding of the applicable laws and the potential implications of each legal action taken.
• Dealing with multiple parties: The lawyers had to interact with several entities, including Google, Twitter, and the individual behind the defamatory accounts. This required effective communication and negotiation skills to ensure each party understood their obligations and cooperated with the legal process.
• Technological challenges: The case involved the use of various digital platforms and required the lawyers to have a strong understanding of the technological aspects of the case. This included understanding how online platforms function, their policies, and the potential loopholes that could be exploited by malicious actors.
• Tracking down anonymous individuals: The defamatory content was posted by anonymous Twitter accounts, making it difficult for the lawyers to identify and hold the individuals responsible. The NPO application in this catfishing defamation case was one way to obtain disclosure information from the internet companies, but it came with its own challenges, as Twitter was concerned about potential adverse consequences.
• Balancing costs and outcomes: The lawyers needed to weigh the potential costs of pursuing legal action against the desired outcomes for their client. In this case, Mr Jerome decided not to proceed with incurring further costs after the three offending tweets were deleted. The lawyers had to be strategic in choosing which battles to fight to achieve the best results for their client
• Time sensitivity: The longer the defamatory content remained online, the more damage it could cause to Mr Jerome. The lawyers had to act quickly and efficiently to minimise the impact of the allegations on their client's personal and professional life.

Overall, the case presented a unique set of challenges for the legal team, requiring them to draw upon their expertise in privacy law, digital platforms, and effective negotiation to achieve a successful outcome for their client.

Lawyer’s thoughts about the case

As the acting lawyer in the catfishing defamation case, I found it to be a fascinating and challenging experience. The case was both legally and emotionally complex, and it pushed me to think critically about the intersection of law, technology, and human relationships. Here are some of my thoughts regarding the case:

1. Balancing rights and responsibilities: I was struck by the delicate balance between an individual's right to privacy and the freedom of expression of others. This case forced me to consider how far we should go to protect one's reputation and privacy, while also respecting the rights of others to express their opinions and experiences.
2. The evolving nature of technology: The case highlighted the rapid pace at which technology is evolving and its impact on our lives. As a lawyer, I found it crucial to stay up-to-date with the latest developments in digital platforms and their policies to effectively represent clients in cases like this.
3. The power of anonymity: I was reminded of the double-edged sword that is anonymity on the internet. While it allows for freedom of expression and a sense of security, it can also enable individuals to spread false and damaging information without consequence. This case underscored the importance of finding ways to hold individuals accountable for their actions online without infringing on their right to privacy.
4. The role of online platforms: I was intrigued by the responsibility that online platforms like Google and Twitter have in cases like this. They play a crucial role in shaping the online environment and have the power to protect or harm individual reputations. As a lawyer, I found it essential to understand their policies and work with them to achieve the best possible outcome for my client.
5. The human element: This case served as a powerful reminder of the emotional toll that privacy breaches and defamatory content can have on individuals. It reinforced the importance of empathy and understanding in my work as a lawyer, as well as the need to be mindful of the potential consequences of my actions on all parties involved.
6. Cost-benefit analysis: The case taught me the value of carefully assessing the costs and benefits of pursuing legal action for my client. In this case, Mr. Jerome ultimately decided not to incur further costs when the three Twitter accounts were suspended. This decision-making process highlighted the importance of being strategic and keeping my client's best interests at heart.

In conclusion, this catfishing defamation case was a thought-provoking and educational experience that expanded my understanding of privacy law, technology, and the human side of legal disputes. It served as a powerful reminder of the importance of staying current with technological advancements and staying committed to protecting the rights and interests of my clients.

Our lawyers answer questions about defamation law in the UK

Below are some of the most common questions clients have asked us concerning defamation law in the UK. Remember, the intricacies of defamation law can be complex, and anyone dealing with such issues should seek advice from a legal professional who is familiar with the facts of their specific case to understand their rights and potential actions fully.

How much does a defamation case cost in the UK?

Is defamation illegal in the UK?

How do I prove defamation in the UK?

What are the defences for a defamation claim in the UK?

How do I prove defamation UK?

What is the legal test for defamation?

Is it easier to win a defamation case in the UK?

How long does it take to get a defamation case in the UK?

Can you go to the police about slander in the UK?

Who Cannot sue for defamation in the UK?

Who has the burden of proof for slander UK?

What counts as defamation UK?

Why is it hard to win a defamation case?

is it possible to bring a defamation claim in the small claim court?

How much does a defamation case cost in the UK?

The cost of a defamation case in the UK can vary greatly depending on various factors, such as the nature and complexity of the case, the length of time it takes to complete, and the individuals involved. For straightforward cases, it may cost under £5,000 if the situation can be resolved with a detailed letter before legal action. The defamation cease and desist letter before legal action would effectively pre-empt any realistic chance for the respondent to defend their defamatory actions. Investing in a well-drafted letter before legal action can be worthwhile, as it may lead to an early settlement without the necessity for protracted and expensive legal proceedings. However, for complex defamation cases, the costs could escalate to £50,000 or more.

The complexity of a case can arise from intricate legal issues and a large volume of evidence. Simultaneously, some cases might seem straightforward, but they might involve a difficult respondent who chooses to represent himself. Legal proceedings against a litigant in person (someone who represents themselves without a lawyer) can often increase costs, as the court expects the claimant to comply with procedural matters, which under normal circumstances would be shared between both parties. It's essential to bear in mind that these are broad estimates and actual costs can vary. Always consult with a legal professional for accurate information related to your specific circumstances.

Is defamation illegal in the UK?

While the term "illegal" usually refers to actions that are prohibited by law and can result in criminal penalties, defamation in the UK doesn't strictly fall under this category. In other words, defamation is not a criminal act in the UK, and therefore, it isn't considered "illegal" in the traditional sense. However, defamation can be considered unlawful, meaning that it can lead to civil legal consequences.

If a person defames someone else, they can be taken to a civil court, where the claimant could potentially win an injunction, compensation, and other remedies. It's important to note, though, that in some cases where defamation is published with an intention to harass the victim, the situation can be viewed differently.

If the defamatory activities meet the threshold for harassment, this can potentially involve criminal law. In such a scenario, the police could take legal action against the person committing the defamation, making it a criminal, hence "illegal", act. You can read more here about online defamation and harassment.

How do I prove defamation in the UK?

If you believe you've been defamed in the UK, you'll need to prove several key elements to establish your case. Here's what you need to demonstrate:

• The statement was defamatory: The comment or material must lower you in the estimation of right-thinking members of society. This means that it negatively affects your reputation in a substantial way. You can read more here about how the court works out a defamatory meaning of a publication. 
• The statement caused or is likely to cause, ‘serious harm’ to you: Introduced with the Defamation Act 2013, the 'serious harm' requirement means that the statement must have caused or will likely cause significant damage to your reputation. If you're a business, you must also prove financial loss.
• The statement refers to you: You need to show that the defamatory statement was about you. It is not always necessary for you to be named; it is enough if you can be identified in some other way.
• The statement was published: Publication, in the context of defamation, means the communication of the defamatory statement to at least one person other than you. It could be through various means such as speech, writing, or some form of broadcast.
• There is no lawful justification or other defence: The defendant may try to use defences like truth (the statement was true), honest opinion (the statement was a viewpoint that could be honestly held based on the facts), or public interest (it was in the public interest to make the statement). If these or other defences can't be established, then you'll have a stronger case.

These are complex legal matters, and each defamation case is unique. If you feel you've been defamed, it's recommended that you consult with a legal professional to guide you through the process and help present the strongest possible case.

What are the defences for a defamation claim in the UK?

Defending a defamation claim in the UK involves asserting one of several established legal defences. These defences are based on principles of free speech, fairness, and the public interest. Here are the main defences:

The Defence of Truth:

This is a complete defence to a defamation claim. If the defendant can prove that the statement made about the claimant was true, or substantially true, then this defence will succeed. In UK defamation law, truth is a complete defence to a claim of defamation. This means that if a defendant (the person accused of defamation) can prove that the allegedly defamatory statement they made about the claimant (the person alleging defamation) was true or substantially true, then the defence will succeed and they will not be liable for defamation. Here are the key aspects of this defence:

• Whole truth or substantial truth: It's important to note that the statement does not need to be entirely true to qualify for this defence. The test is one of substantial truth. This means that if the 'sting' or main substance of the statement is true, even if some minor details are not, the defence can still be successful. For example, if the defendant makes a statement saying that the claimant was convicted of a crime on a specific date, but they got the date wrong, the defence of truth would still apply if the claimant was indeed convicted of the crime.
• The burden of proof: Unlike some other defences, the burden of proof here rests with the defendant. It's the defendant's responsibility to provide evidence to prove the truth or substantial truth of the statement. This can involve presenting documents, witness testimony, or any other evidence that supports the truth of the statement.
• No need to prove public benefit or good intentions: The defence of truth doesn't require the defendant to show that their statement was in the public interest or that they had good intentions in making it. The only thing that matters is the truth or substantial truth of the statement.

In summary, the defence of truth provides a robust protection for defendants in defamation cases. However, it's not without its complexities, and it requires careful handling and often detailed evidence. If you're involved in a defamation case and are considering using the defence of truth, it's usually advisable to seek professional legal advice to understand your rights and options.

The Defence of Honest Opinion:

This defence applies if the defendant can demonstrate that the statement was an expression of their honestly held opinion rather than a statement of fact. It must be based on any fact that existed at the time the statement was published or anything asserted to be a fact in a privileged statement. The defence of honest opinion is another crucial defence in UK defamation law. The goal of this defence is to protect freedom of speech and to allow for the expression of opinions that may be critical or harsh, so long as they are honestly held.

To successfully use this defence, a defendant (the person accused of defamation) must meet the following requirements:

• Statement of Opinion: The defendant must prove that the statement in question was a statement of opinion and not a statement of fact. This can sometimes be a complex task, as it can be difficult to distinguish between fact and opinion in some instances. Usually, it needs to be clear to an average reader or listener that what is being expressed is an opinion.
• Basis in Fact: The opinion must be based on facts that existed at the time the statement was published. These facts must be indicated in the statement or be generally known. If the basis for the opinion is not clear, the defendant may need to provide additional evidence to show that their opinion was grounded in fact.
• Honest Belief: The defendant must have honestly held the opinion they expressed at the time of publication. It's important to note that this does not mean the opinion needs to be reasonable, fair, or balanced. Even if others find the opinion extreme, absurd, or highly prejudiced, so long as it's an honestly held opinion, the defence can still be successful.
• Reasonable Person Test: A reasonable person must be able to consider the statement as an opinion based on the underlying facts.

For example, a restaurant reviewer might make negative comments about a meal they had at a restaurant. If the restaurant owner sued for defamation, the reviewer could potentially use the defence of honest opinion, as long as they could show that their negative comments were based on the actual meal they had eaten, and were not invented or exaggerated beyond what they honestly thought about it. Like all defences to defamation, the application of the honest opinion defence will depend on the specific circumstances of the case. Therefore, if you find yourself involved in a defamation case, whether as a claimant or a defendant, it's advisable to seek professional legal advice.

The Defence of  Privilege (Absolute or Qualified):

Privilege protects certain types of communication from defamation claims. Absolute privilege applies to certain proceedings, such as those in Parliament or in court, where the need for free speech outweighs the potential for defamation. Qualified privilege protects the communication of potentially defamatory statements made in the public interest, provided the communication was not made maliciously.

The Defence of Publication on Matter of Public Interest:

If the defendant can show that the statement was on a matter of public interest and they reasonably believed that publishing the statement was in the public interest, this defence may apply. The defence of privilege is another fundamental aspect of UK defamation law, aimed at balancing the need to protect individuals' reputations with the need for free and frank discussion in certain contexts.

Absolute Privilege:

Absolute privilege offers total protection against defamation claims, regardless of the motive behind the statement. This means that the person making the statement could knowingly say something false or defamatory, and yet not be liable for defamation. Absolute privilege applies to certain proceedings where it is deemed essential that participants can speak openly without fear of legal consequences. This includes:

• Statements made in the course of parliamentary proceedings, including speeches by Members of Parliament and witnesses giving evidence to parliamentary committees.
• Statements made in court, or in documents prepared for court proceedings, such as witness testimonies, affidavits, or pleadings.
• Statements made in certain other legal proceedings, such as public inquiries or disciplinary hearings of professional bodies.

Qualified Privilege:

Qualified privilege offers protection for potentially defamatory statements made in other contexts, where it's considered to be in the public interest that people should be able to speak freely. This can include:

• Media reports of certain public proceedings or official statements.
• Statements made by individuals in the performance of a legal, social, or moral duty, such as a reference given by an employer.
• Fair and accurate reports of public meetings or press conferences.

However, qualified privilege is 'qualified' because it can be defeated if the claimant can prove that the statement was made with malice, meaning the defendant knew the statement was false or acted with reckless disregard for its truth. As with all defamation defences, the specific application of the privilege defence depends on the circumstances of each case. If you're involved in a defamation claim, it's strongly recommended to seek legal advice to understand how these defences could be applied.

The Defence of Innocent Dissemination:

This defence is available to those who, in the course of a business, unknowingly and without negligence, published defamatory material authored by a third party. This could include an internet service provider or a bookseller. The defence of innocent dissemination is particularly relevant in the age of digital communication, where many businesses are involved in the transmission, hosting, or distribution of third-party content.

In UK defamation law, the defence of innocent dissemination is available to individuals or organisations that have, in the course of their business, unknowingly and without negligence, facilitated the publication of defamatory material authored by a third party. This defence is often used by intermediaries such as booksellers, librarians, internet service providers (ISPs), or website operators. These entities may distribute or host vast amounts of content but have limited or no control over its creation. To successfully invoke the defence of innocent dissemination, a defendant must generally show the following:

1. They did not author or edit the defamatory content.
2. They were not involved in the decision to publish the defamatory content.
3. They were not negligent in relation to the publication of the defamatory content.
4. They did not know, and had no reason to believe, that they were contributing to the publication of defamatory content.

For instance, suppose an ISP hosts a website that contains a defamatory statement posted by a user. In that case, the ISP might be able to use the defence of innocent dissemination if it can prove it had no knowledge of the defamatory content and acted promptly to remove it once notified. However, if it's demonstrated that the defendant ought to have known that the material was likely to be defamatory, or if they failed to take action when the defamation was brought to their attention, they may not be able to use this defence. It's important to note that the specifics of each case can greatly influence the application of the innocent dissemination defence. Given the complexities of defamation law, it's generally advisable to seek legal advice if you find yourself involved in a defamation case.

The Defence of Consent:

If the claimant consented to the publication of the statement, the defendant cannot be held liable for defamation. Remember, the application of these defences will depend on the specific circumstances of each case. If you find yourself involved in a defamation case, whether as a claimant or defendant, it's always wise to seek legal advice. Consent is an absolute defence to a defamation claim. This means that if a person (the claimant) gave their permission for the allegedly defamatory statement to be published, the person who made the statement (the defendant) cannot be held liable for defamation.

The rationale behind this defence is that it would be unjust to allow a person to sue for defamation when they have freely permitted the publication of the statement in question. Essentially, if you've agreed to the statement being made public, you can't then complain about the damage it does to your reputation. The consent must be freely given, and it must be clear that the claimant was fully aware of the nature of the statement when they gave their consent. The defendant would generally need to provide some evidence to demonstrate that they had the claimant's consent.

This defence can apply in various contexts. For example, if a person agrees to an interview for a magazine article or a documentary, knowing that certain potentially defamatory statements about them will be included, they may be considered to have consented to the publication of those statements.

However, the application of the consent defence, like all defences to defamation, will depend on the specific circumstances of each case. For instance, the scope of the consent and the context in which it was given can all be relevant factors. If consent was obtained through deception or under duress, it may not be valid.

What is the legal test for defamation?

In the realm of defamation laws, it's important to clarify that there isn't a strict "test" as such, particularly given the varying laws across different jurisdictions. However, in the UK, establishing defamation involves satisfying several critical elements as per the Defamation Act 2013.

For a statement to be legally considered defamatory, its publication must have resulted in or have a likelihood to cause significant harm to the reputation of the claimant. The statement must essentially lower the claimant in the estimation of right-thinking members of society, cause them to be shunned or avoided, or expose them to hatred, ridicule, or contempt. The statement must also refer to the claimant and have been published to a third party. This means it must have been made known to someone other than the person making the statement and the person the statement is about. If the claimant is a trading corporation, it must also prove that the statement has caused, or is likely to cause, serious financial loss.

Moreover, the claimant must be able to overcome any defences the defendant might raise, such as truth, honest opinion, or privilege. Therefore, rather than a single legal 'test', proving defamation involves satisfying these interconnected elements.

Defamatory Statement:

In the process of a defamation case, the initial step entails demonstrating that the statement under scrutiny is indeed defamatory. A defamatory statement holds the potential to inflict harm on the reputation of an individual or a corporation. This could be brought about in various ways.

For example, the statement might incite feelings of hatred, ridicule, or contempt towards the person or entity to which it refers. This could lead to a situation where the individual or corporation is shunned or avoided by others due to the negativity associated with the statement. Alternatively, a defamatory statement might lower the subject in the estimation of 'right-thinking' members of society.

This can effectively undermine their standing or reputation in their community or industry. Thus, a statement that fulfils any of these criteria can be classified as defamatory within the scope of UK law.

The Statement Refers to the Claimant:

The statement must be about, or refer to, the claimant. It's not necessary for the claimant to be specifically named if they can be identified in some other way. In the context of UK defamation law, establishing that a statement is defamatory is the initial step in the process. A defamatory statement is one which has the potential to injure the reputation of an individual or a corporation. This potential harm could manifest itself in various ways.

For instance, a defamatory statement could expose the person or entity in question to feelings of hatred, ridicule, or contempt from others. Similarly, such a statement might lead to the person or entity being shunned or avoided by others due to the negative image portrayed by the statement. Furthermore, a defamatory statement could lower the individual or entity in the estimation of 'right-thinking' members of society, thereby negatively affecting their standing or reputation. In essence, if a statement fulfils any of these criteria, it can be considered defamatory under UK law.

The Statement has been Published:

The defamatory statement must have been published or communicated to a third party. In defamation law, "published" means that someone other than the person making the statement and the person the statement is about has seen, heard, or read it. 

In terms of defamation law in the UK, the requirement for a statement to be considered published is that it must have been communicated or made available to a third party. This means that the alleged defamatory statement must have been seen, heard, or read by someone who is neither the person making the statement, nor the individual or entity the statement is about.

Essentially, this suggests that the potentially harmful statement has been shared or disseminated in some way beyond the parties directly involved in the statement's creation and its subject. This dissemination could be via various means, such as print, broadcast, or online platforms. The concept of publication in defamation law highlights the fact that defamation involves damage to a person's or entity's reputation in the eyes of others.

Serious Harm:

The claimant must demonstrate that the defamatory statement has caused, or is likely to cause, serious harm to their reputation. If the claimant is a for-profit business, they must also show that the statement has caused or is likely to cause them serious financial loss.

A pivotal aspect of a defamation claim under UK law is demonstrating serious harm. This requires the claimant, or the person alleging defamation, to provide evidence that the defamatory statement has caused or has a likelihood of causing severe damage to their reputation. The idea behind this requirement is to ensure that the courts only deal with cases where substantial damage has occurred, and not trivial matters. Serious harm may manifest in various ways, such as damaging the individual's personal or professional relationships or standing in the community.

When the claimant is a for-profit business entity, there is an additional requirement to demonstrate that the defamatory statement has led to, or there is a high chance it will lead to severe financial loss. This element recognises that for businesses, harm to reputation often translates directly into monetary damage. This could be through loss of clients or customers, decreased business opportunities, or increased costs due to the need to mitigate the damage caused by the defamatory statement.

Once these elements have been established, the burden shifts to the defendant, who might then attempt to avail one of several defences, including truth, honest opinion, privilege (absolute or qualified), and public interest. If a defendant can successfully establish one of these defences, they may avoid liability. 

Is it easier to win a defamation case in the UK?

The difficulty of winning a defamation case can depend largely on the jurisdiction in which the case is brought. The UK and the US, for example, have different defamation laws and standards of proof which can impact the ease or difficulty of winning a case. Defamation Law in the UK vs the US: In the UK, the burden of proof generally falls on the defendant. This means that if someone sues you for defamation, it is up to you as the defendant to prove that your statement was true, or that it is protected by another defence such as honest opinion or privilege.

The UK law also does not distinguish between public and private figures when considering defamation cases, meaning everyone is given the same level of protection. On the other hand, in the US, the burden of proof typically falls on the plaintiff (the one who is claiming defamation). This is especially true when the plaintiff is a public figure, like a politician or a celebrity. In such cases, they not only have to prove that the statement was false and defamatory but also that it was made with "actual malice" - meaning the person who made the statement knew it was false or acted with reckless disregard for the truth.

This can make defamation cases harder to win in the US, especially for public figures. Impact of Trial by Judge vs Trial by Jury: In the UK, defamation cases are usually tried by a judge alone, whereas in the US, they're often tried by a jury. This can impact the outcome of a case, as individual biases can influence judgement. In the UK, a judge, who is a legal expert, makes the decision based on the facts presented and the law. This can provide a more consistent and predictable outcome, but it's also subject to the interpretation and discretion of a single individual. In the US, a jury, typically consisting of 12 ordinary citizens, decides the case.

This means the decision is based on the collective judgement of a group of people, which could arguably be more balanced and less likely to be influenced by a single individual's point of view. However, this can also lead to less predictability, as the decision is more likely to be influenced by the personal experiences and biases of the jurors.

In conclusion, it can be easier to win a defamation case in the UK compared to the US due to the differences in defamation laws, standards of proof, and trial methods. However, each case is unique and the outcome will always depend on the specific circumstances. Anyone dealing with a potential defamation claim should seek legal advice to understand their rights and potential outcomes.

How long does it take to get a defamation case in the UK?

The length of time it takes to complete a defamation case in the UK can vary widely based on several factors. These factors include the complexity of the case, the number of parties involved, the willingness of the parties to settle, the court's schedule, and any potential appeals. However, broadly speaking, a defamation case might progress through the following stages:

• Pre-action stage: This involves a letter before action, any necessary investigations, and possibly pre-action negotiations. This could take a few weeks to several months.
• Pleadings stage: This involves the preparation and exchange of formal court documents (Claim Form, Particulars of Claim, Defence, and possibly a Reply). This stage usually takes a few months.
• Disclosure and evidence stage: This involves the parties disclosing relevant documents to each other and gathering evidence, including witness statements. Depending on the volume of documents and the number of witnesses, this stage could take several months.
• Trial: The trial itself may last anywhere from a day to a few weeks, depending on the complexity of the case.
• judgement and possible appeal: The judge may deliver their judgement immediately, or they may reserve judgement to deliver at a later date. If there is an appeal, the process can extend for several more months, and possibly longer.

In total, from the start of proceedings to judgement (excluding any appeal), a defamation case in the UK could take anywhere from about a year to several years. It is important to note that these are general time frames and each case is unique. Legal advice should be sought for an estimation tailored to a specific case. It's also worth mentioning that you typically have one year from the date of publication of the defamatory statement to bring a defamation claim, according to the Defamation Act 2013. However, courts have the discretion to hear cases brought outside this period if they consider it just and equitable to do so.

Can you go to the police about slander in the UK?

In the UK, slander and defamation more broadly are typically civil matters rather than criminal ones. This means that the police do not usually get involved in cases of slander. Instead, the person who believes they have been defamed would typically seek legal advice and possibly bring a claim in the civil courts. However, there could be circumstances where a defamatory statement could also involve criminal behaviour.

For instance, if the statement is part of a campaign of harassment, or incites violence or hatred based on race, religion, or other protected characteristics, then it might be a criminal offence and you could report it to the police. Also, under the Communications Act 2003, it's an offence to send a message that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character over a public electronic communications network (which includes social media).

So, if the slanderous statement fits these criteria, it could potentially be a matter for the police. Nevertheless, in most cases, slander and defamation are dealt with through the civil courts. If you believe you've been defamed, it's usually recommended that you seek legal advice to understand your rights and the best course of action.

Who Cannot sue for defamation in the UK?

1. Dead people: One of the fundamental principles in defamation law is that a claim must be brought by a living person. The dead cannot be defamed, and their estate or family members cannot sue for defamation on their behalf.
2. Government bodies: Government bodies, including local authorities and governmental departments, are not permitted to sue for defamation in the UK. This is based on the principle established in the 1993 case of Derbyshire County Council v. Times Newspapers Ltd, which found that it was contrary to the public interest for governmental bodies to sue for defamation.
3. Trade associations: Trade associations are typically not permitted to sue for defamation on behalf of their members, unless they can demonstrate that the defamatory statement caused them, as an organisation, serious financial loss.
4. Companies: Companies can bring a defamation claim, but under the Defamation Act 2013, a company must show that the defamatory statement has caused, or is likely to cause, serious financial loss.

Who has the burden of proof for slander UK?

In the UK, in a slander or defamation case, the burden of proof primarily falls on the defendant (the person accused of defamation). This means the defendant must demonstrate that their statement falls under one of the defences to defamation, such as truth, honest opinion, absolute or qualified privilege, or that the statement was in the public interest.

However, this does not mean that the claimant (the person who alleges they have been defamed) has nothing to prove. The claimant has the initial burden of establishing that: The statement was defamatory. The statement referred to them. The statement was published to a third party.

The statement has caused or is likely to cause serious harm to their reputation (if the claimant is a business, they must prove serious financial loss). Moreover, in some cases, the defendant may raise a factual defence where the claimant may need to provide evidence to the contrary. For example, if the defendant raises a defence of truth, the claimant may need to demonstrate that the statement was indeed false. Additionally, if a claimant brings a claim for malicious falsehood - where they must prove that a false statement was made maliciously that caused them damage - the burden of proof is on the claimant. Often, legal action for defamation against online reviewers will also involve a claim for malicious falsehood. 

What counts as defamation UK?

Defamation in the UK is defined by making a false statement that harms the reputation of an individual or a corporation. The false statement must be made to a third party, meaning someone other than the person defamed must have seen, heard, or read it. There are two types of defamation:

Libel:

This refers to a defamatory statement that has been published in written form, or in a form that has some degree of permanence, such as a tweet, a Facebook post, a newspaper article, or a TV broadcast.

Slander:

This refers to a defamatory statement that is spoken or in a non-permanent form. Under the Defamation Act 2013, a statement is not defamatory unless its publication has caused or is likely to cause serious harm to the reputation of the claimant. For a claim to be considered as defamation in the UK, the following elements typically need to be proven:

• The statement was defamatory.
• The statement referred to the claimant.
• The statement was published to a third party.
• The statement has caused or is likely to cause serious harm to the reputation of the claimant.
• If the claimant is a corporate body, they must also show that the statement has caused or is likely to cause them serious financial loss. If these elements are satisfied, then the statement could be considered as defamation. However, there are also several defences available, including truth, honest opinion, absolute or qualified privilege, public interest, and others.

Why is it hard to win the defamation case?

Winning a defamation case can be challenging due to several factors:

• Burden of proof: In defamation cases, the claimant (the person who claims they were defamed) must establish several elements to win their case. They must prove that the statement was defamatory, that it referred to them, that it was published to a third party, and that it has caused or is likely to cause serious harm to their reputation. For businesses, they must also show serious financial loss. Each of these elements can be complex and challenging to prove, making it hard to win the case.
• Substantial truth: Under UK law, truth is a complete defence to a defamation claim. What's more, the statement only needs to be substantially true, not wholly true. If the defendant (the person accused of defamation) can prove that the 'sting' or main substance of their statement is true, they may win the case, even if some minor details are inaccurate or false. This aspect can make defamation cases especially difficult for claimants.
• Honest opinion: Another possible defence is honest opinion. If the defendant can show that their statement was a genuine expression of their opinion, based on facts that existed at the time and were either referred to in the statement or widely known, they might be able to use this defence. This can make winning a defamation claim more difficult, as it requires the claimant to demonstrate that the defendant did not honestly hold the opinion they expressed.
• Public interest and privilege: Statements that are in the public interest or made in certain privileged situations, such as in Parliament or in court, may also be protected. These defences can make it harder for claimants to win defamation cases.
• Belief in the truth: If a defendant genuinely believed that the statement they made was true at the time of publication, this can influence the case. Even if the statement is later found to be false, the defendant's belief in its veracity can be a relevant factor.
• Costs and stress of litigation: Litigation can be expensive, time-consuming, and stressful. The costs involved in bringing a defamation case, especially if it proceeds to trial, can be substantial. Even if a claimant has a strong case, the cost and stress of litigation can deter them from pursuing their claim to conclusion.
• Potential for Streisand Effect: The "Streisand Effect" refers to the phenomenon where attempting to suppress information can inadvertently lead to greater publicity for that information. In the context of a defamation case, this means that suing for defamation can sometimes draw more attention to the defamatory statements, causing further reputational harm. Given these challenges, it's generally advisable for anyone considering a defamation claim to seek professional legal advice.

is it possible to bring a defamation claim in the small claim court?

Yes. But only in exceptional cases. The so called small claim court is effectively part of the county court. Currently defamation claims need to be issued in the High Court, unless the parties agree to give the county court jurisdiction in their dispute under section 18 of the County Courts Act 1984. Section 15 of the same Act provides that the county court does not have jurisdiction to hear and determine any defamation action.

A claim can only be transferred to the county court by the High Court under section 40 of the 1984 Act. A defamation claim A claim can then find its way to the county court only if it is transferred there, by the High Court, under section 40 of the 1984 Act. The criteria for transfer of defamation claims from the High Court to the county court are set out under Civil Procedure Rule 30.3, which is a non-exclusive but compulsory list of matters to which the court must have regard.

The transferring court must have regard to the financial value of the claim and the availability of a judge specialising in the type of claim in question. The court must also consider the practical and logistical facilities of competing venues and the importance of the outcome of the claim to the public in general

.

How to obtain disclosure from a website operator if you live outside the United States

Numerous strategies exist for obtaining disclosure from a website, online platform, or company based in the United States. It is difficult to find an attorney who is highly experienced in securing disclosure orders from the US at speed and in a cost-effective way.

All you need to know about Norwich Pharmacal Orders

Norwich Pharmacal Orders are a legal mechanism used in the UK for obtaining information from a third party involved in wrongdoings or unlawful activities. This legal remedy, named after the landmark case of Norwich Pharmacal v Customs and Excise Commissioners, is widely used in various litigation cases, ranging from intellectual property disputes to cybercrime investigations. However, despite its frequent usage, the Norwich Pharmacal Order remains shrouded in mystery and confusion amongst many legal practitioners and individuals.

How to find out the identity of online criminals

Financial crimes online have become more prevalent and sophisticated with the rise of digital technology. Countless people have suffered losses at the hands of cybercriminals who operate anonymously, making it challenging to track them down.

Norwich Pharmacal orders have been an instrumental tool in the legal system to assist people who have been victims of online financial crimes. This order compels third parties that have information to reveal the identity of cybercriminals who engage in illegal activities online. The challenge, however, for the victims of the crimes, is obtaining a Norwich Pharmacal order fast and cost effectively.

Strategies and approaches for removing fake online reviews

In this case study, we explore the challenges faced by a small business suffering from defamatory online reviews and the strategic approach taken by a law firm to effectively remove fake online content. By examining the specific steps, legal tactics, and collaborative efforts employed, this article aims to provide valuable insights for businesses dealing with similar issues and highlight the importance of a tailored, cost-effective approach to addressing online defamation and protecting a company's reputation.

28 U.S.C. § 1782(a) applications are no longer just for the rich

The process of gathering evidence in internet law international litigation can be a complex and costly task. One way to reduce the burden of cost is through the use of 28 U.S.C. § 1782(a), which allows parties in a foreign proceeding to obtain discovery in the United States.

However, the costs associated with this process can often exceed the benefits, rendering it impractical for many parties. We are very proud of our team who managed to turn applications under 28 U.S.C. § 1782(a) from super-expensive into the far more affordable procedure it is now for our UK clients and for our clients from all over the world, despite the inherent complexities and costs associated with the process.

Website disclosure orders

You can obtain disclosure from nearly any website operator and/or domain name registrar. Our firm specialises in obtaining disclosure orders from website operators and from domain registrars who operate from different jurisdictions. In nearly all cases, we have been successful in securing disclosure orders for our clients regardless of the location of the website, blog or social media platform.

Table of content

Obtain disclosure from website operators

Obtain disclosure from a UK website operator

Obtain disclosure from US website operators

Obtain disclosure of domain name owners

Obtain disclosure of online harassers

Obtain disclosure from website operators

Over the past 25 years, we have developed special working relationships with internet law attorneys from many parts of the world. Often, together with our international network of local attorneys, we obtain disclosure orders from website operators, through local courts at lower costs and higher speed.

When our clients require disclosure orders from various website operators in the United States, which are located in different states, we are often able to file a claim and a disclosure subpoena in a single court and then have the subpoena domesticated throughout the United States.

This process often results in high speed and lower costs in obtaining various disclosure orders from different websites where the disclosures are required as part of a single claim.

Obtain disclosure from UK website operator

We always plan and coordinate the different needs to obtain various disclosure orders from UK website operators, in a way that is aimed to produce an optimum outcome for our clients.

Because of our long-term experience in obtaining disclosure orders from website operators in the UK, we can tell, in many cases, what information each website operator has in their possession and how to approach the website operators so that they will co-operate with our disclosure application.

In nearly all cases, we do that groundwork before we get to court, which helps reduce the costs to our clients and to have a smooth third-party disclosure hearing at court.

Obtain disclosure from US website operators

Disclosure orders from website operators in the US should be handled with care and in a way that will not end up being counterproductive to the applicant. There are website operators in the US who are keen to protect their anonymous users’ identities and who will therefore contest most disclosure applications on the grounds of free speech.

Navigating through the various legal processes in the different states in the US could be a challenging task to the unfamiliar foreign litigant. We have a trusted record when it comes to obtaining disclosure from US website operators, which makes Cohen Davis a preferred internet law specialist UK law firm for UK based individuals and companies who wish to obtain disclosure orders through the American courts.

Obtain disclosure of domain name owners

It is possible for individuals to register domain names under a pseudonym and with very few verifiable details, a fact which often makes it nearly impossible to track down someone who registered a domain name for the purpose of defaming or harassing an individual or a company.

Exposing the registered owner of a particular domain name is often a challenge that even a local court is unable to overcome. Depending on the registrar’s location, we can challenge the validity of a domain name registration in various ways, including through local courts, through internet service providers, and through Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN).

Obtain disclosure of online harassers

Online harassers often prefer to hide behind a pseudonym but even in cases that lasted for over 13 years of online harassment, we have been able to identify and locate the individuals harassing our clients.

We facilitate the disclosure of online harassers by carrying out covert and open investigator work and by pursuing various legal avenues, which may include obtaining disclosure orders through courts in the UK and around the world and then tracking down the whereabouts of the online harasser, to bring him or her to justice.

Affordable Norwich Pharmacal Order (NPO) Service

Norwich Pharmacal Orders (NPOs) are a type of order which can be obtained from the High Court. They are frequently used in cases where confidential information is held by a third party and is needed in order to bring proceedings against another party, for example where someone has been the victim of online harassment.

28 U.S.C. § 1782(a) made easy

Given the global nature of the internet, there is a constant need for various court orders to be domesticated in foreign jurisdictions. Many social media companies, domain name registrars, servers and gaming platforms are located in the US. This makes obtaining disclosure by a non-US individual from those platforms a challenging task even for experienced lawyers.

Find hidden domain owner

Uncovering the true identity of a domain name owner can be a complicated and time-consuming process. In some cases, you may need to get a court order or a subpoena to access the information you are seeking.

A court order or subpoena can require an Internet service provider (ISP) or domain name registrar to disclose the identity of the person or organisation behind a particular domain name. This blog post will provide a detailed overview of the process for applying for a disclosure order or subpoena to find out who owns a domain name.

What can I do about an unfair Google review?

Whilst Google's review policies are stringent and aimed at ensuring that every review is legitimate and unbiased, there are situations that warrant removing a review, such as if it violates Google's content policies or is fraudulent. There are also instances where a review may be removed following a request from a business owner or a third party, such as their solicitors. To get a better understanding of under what circumstances Google would remove an online business review, we will examine the different policy violations and instances that may warrant removal in this blog post.

We work relentlessly to shield our clients from internet defamation

Each day, we help our clients defend against defamation on the internet. Fighting online defamation is one of the core areas of our law firms. Every day, we help our clients defend against online defamation and other types of digital attacks. We understand how important a business’s online reputation can be, and that's why we strive to help protect it.

Legal advice on business reputation

At Cohen Davis, we understand how important it is to protect your online business reputation. Your reputation is on the line every time you put something online and each time you interact with a customer or a client, and anything negative that is said about your business can spread like wildfire, damaging it beyond repair. In today's digital age, it's critical to have a solid online reputation management strategy in place to protect your business from these potentially devastating consequences.

Blackmail injunction case

Explanation of Chase Levels

Chase Levels are a useful tool for determining the degree of defamatory meaning or imputation in a statement, but they should not be considered the be-all and end-all when it comes to this analysis.

How to remove a defamatory Google review

One of the most frustrating aspects of Google reviews for business owners is that people can post defamation anonymously, without having to property identify themselves. This makes it difficult to prove to Google that the review you are complaining about is fake.

Moderating posts on a review website. What are the requirements and what should your policy be

There are different rules for website operators in the UK, which place more responsibility on them rather than on operators of websites in the United States.

Online reputation attack legal advice

Specialist internet law business services

Cohen Davis is a niche law firm that specialises in internet law and provides high-quality legal services to clients all over the world. Our firm comprises an experienced team of legal professionals who are dedicated to protecting our clients' business interests in the fast-paced and ever-evolving world of technology. Our lawyers possess a deep understanding of the legal issues that businesses and individuals face in cyberspace, and we are committed to delivering practical, effective solutions tailored to our clients' unique needs.

Cohen Davis business services

At Cohen Davis, we have handled a wide range of cases involving online defamation, intellectual property, e-commerce, data protection, and cybercrime. We understand the complex legal challenges that can arise in these areas and provide creative, strategic advice to help our clients achieve their objectives. We also conduct training sessions and workshops on internet law and online reputation management to educate our clients on the best practices and legal requirements of the online world.

Our team of highly skilled professionals is dedicated to providing exceptional services that often exceed expectations. With a focus on quality and attention to detail, we work closely with our clients to understand their businesses and develop strategies that deliver tangible results. From initial consultations to ongoing support, we adopt a collaborative approach to ensure that our clients receive bespoke solutions that are tailored to their specific needs. Our team is passionate about technology and its potential to transform the world in positive ways.

Protecting your online business reputation

At Cohen Davis, we understand how important it is to protect your online business reputation. Your reputation is on the line every time you put something online and each time you interact with a customer or a client, and anything negative that is said about your business can spread like wildfire, damaging it beyond repair. In today's digital age, it's critical to have a solid online reputation management strategy in place to protect your business from these potentially devastating consequences.

Our team of experts is here to help you monitor, manage, and maintain your online reputation, ensuring that your brand image remains intact and positive. We use the latest techniques and tools to monitor your online presence, identify any potential negative reviews or comments, and work to eliminate or address them before they harm your reputation. Trust us to manage your online reputation while you focus on growing your business.

Resolving domain name disputes

As part of our comprehensive range of internet related business services, Cohen Davis offers dispute resolution for domain names that have been registered or used in bad faith. Domain name disputes can be complex and time-consuming, but our team of experienced solicitors specialise in this area of law and are dedicated to finding swift and effective solutions while minimizing the impact on your business.

We take the time to understand your specific situation and work to protect your rights and interests while negotiating with the other party or bringing the matter to arbitration or court proceedings. Our goal is to help you successfully resolve your domain name dispute so you can get back to running your business with confidence. Trust Cohen Davis for expert legal support in resolving these disputes.

Defending against online defamation

We understand that online defamation can be a serious threat to your business. In today's digital age, it only takes one negative review or false accusation to significantly damage your company's reputation. That's why we offer our expertise to help defend your business against online defamation. Our team of experienced attorneys has a deep understanding of the laws and regulations surrounding online defamation, including libel and slander.

We are dedicated to protecting our clients' reputations by taking the appropriate legal actions, such as sending a cease and desist letter or filing a lawsuit. With our guidance, you can navigate this complex and often emotional issue with confidence, knowing that your business's online presence is being defended by a team of professionals. Don't let online defamation harm your business - contact Cohen Davis to see how we can help.

Helping to remove fake online reviews and defamatory content from search engines

We offer a range of services aimed at protecting individuals and businesses from online defamation. One of our key services involves assisting clients to remove fake online reviews and defamatory content from search engines. In today's digital landscape, online reviews and content can significantly impact a business's reputation and influence consumer decisions.

Unfortunately, fake reviews and defamatory content can easily spread, causing serious harm to brands and individuals. Our team of experts has extensive experience in dealing with such situations, leveraging our in-depth knowledge of UK and international laws to ensure the swift and effective removal of false and damaging online materials from search engines. We work closely with our clients to develop tailored strategies that target the sources of the content and use a range of legal tools to request the removal of offensive materials. Our ultimate goal is to help our clients protect their online reputations and preserve their hard-earned reputations.

Advising on e-commerce regulations and drafting and reviewing website terms and conditions

We understand that e-commerce regulations can be complex and daunting, especially for businesses looking to expand their digital presence. That's why we offer top-notch services in advising on e-commerce regulations, as well as drafting and reviewing website terms and conditions. With our expert guidance, you can rest assured that your e-commerce operations are fully compliant with relevant laws and regulations, protecting your business and its reputation.

Our team of legal professionals has extensive experience in this field, and we keep up to date with the latest developments and changes in e-commerce regulations. We can advise on a range of issues, including consumer rights, data protection, and online advertising. When it comes to drafting and reviewing website terms and conditions, we work closely with our clients to understand their specific needs, helping them to create clear, concise, and legally sound policies that protect both their business and their customers.

Taking over the stressful handling of enquiries and investigations by investigative journalists and by TV outlets

We understand the high level of stress that may come with handling enquiries and investigations by investigative journalists and TV outlets. We recognise that these situations require a great deal of attention and a rapid response to mitigate potential damages to your reputation, brand and business. Therefore, we offer our clients the service of taking over the handling of enquiries and investigations by investigative journalists and TV outlets.

Our experienced team of professionals will work diligently to manage these situations in a calm and efficient manner, providing you with peace of mind and allowing you to focus on other important aspects of your business. We prioritize confidentiality and work to ensure that potentially damaging information is handled with discretion and sensitivity. With the help of our team, you can navigate through these challenging situations with confidence and ease.

Providing guidance on data protection laws

One of our top business services we offer is providing guidance on data protection laws. We understand that data protection laws can be complex and overwhelming, which is why we offer our expertise to help your business navigate these regulations. Our team of legal experts are well-versed in international data protection laws such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), and the Data Protection Act 2018 in the UK.

We work closely with our clients to ensure compliance with these laws and avoid costly violations. Additionally, we can provide workshops and training sessions for your staff to educate them on how to handle personal data securely and in accordance with these laws. Trust us to guide your business towards a successful and compliant future in data protection.

Advising on setting up a new online business

We understand the challenges involved in setting up a new online business. It can be a daunting task with many variables to consider, from choosing the right web hosting provider to creating the perfect brand identity. That’s why we offer expert advising services to guide you through the process, providing you with valuable insights and strategies to ensure your online business is up and running smoothly.

Our experienced team can assist you with everything from selecting the best e-commerce platform to developing a targeted marketing strategy, to help you achieve growth and success in today's competitive digital landscape. With Cohen Davis business services on your side, you can feel confident that you're heading in the right direction towards a profitable and sustainable online business.

Tracking down online fraudsters who have defrauded your business

Cohen Davis is committed to providing our clients with the best advice and support to ensure their businesses remain safe and secure from online threats. One of the critical areas we specialise in is tracking down online fraudsters who have defrauded your business. We understand how devastating it can be for a business to lose money to internet fraudsters, with the financial loss and reputational damage that can ensue.

That's why our team of digital forensics experts use their extensive knowledge and expertise to track down these fraudsters and bring them to justice. We use the latest investigative techniques and tools to gather evidence that can be used in court and assist our clients in seeking compensation. At Cohen Davis, we take pride in utilising our technology and expertise to provide our clients with effective solutions to combat online fraud and keep their businesses protected.

Helping your business recover following an online reputation attack or crisis

We offer comprehensive business services to help you address any issues that may arise, including the aftermath of an online reputation attack or crisis. Our team can help you devise a strategy to mitigate the impact of negative reviews, online trolling, or brand defamation. We can help you remove damaging content from search engine results or social media platforms, monitor your online presence to address new issues as they arise, and provide media training to ensure that your team is ready to handle any difficult questions from journalists or the public.

We understand that a negative online reputation can have a profound impact on your business, and we are here to help you recover and rebuild your reputation, no matter the challenge at hand. Contact us today to learn more about how we can help you protect and promote your business.

What to do if someone is slandering your business on the internet

If you have recently suffered defamation by competitors or if someone is slandering your business, you might be able to do something about it but you will need to act fast.

Is it illegal to post fake online reviews

Why clients choose to work with Cohen Davis Solicitors

How can innocent people protect themselves from false accusations on the internet

False accusations on the internet have become a common occurrence, with the ease of access to social media and other platforms making it easier for anyone to share information without double-checking its validity.

Unfortunately, this has caused a great amount of harm to innocent people, who have been wrongfully accused of wrongdoing and have no means of defending themselves.

What to do when a user posts defamatory content about you on social media

It's no secret that social media can be a breeding ground for defamatory content. Whether it's an ex-partner airing your dirty laundry, or a disgruntled employee badmouthing your company, this type of content can have a major impact on your reputation.

How companies can protect themselves from disgruntled employees

Emergency injunctions

An emergency injunction is a legal order that can be issued by a court in order to protect someone from imminent harm. This type of injunction is typically used in cases of blackmail, harassment and breach of privacy where there is a clear and present danger to the victim.

What to do if you are being harassed on Tattle.life

How to protect yourself against online defamation

How to take down negative articles from the internet

Reputation and crisis management

Reputation crisis management has numerous aspects to it, such as technical, organisational, and legal. Managing the press, pre-empting painful allegations, minimising impact, dealing with customers’ needs, aligning the organisation, and handling related legal matters, require experience and skill, which our lawyers are on standby to offer.

Co-ordinated reputation crisis management

Strategised approach to reputation crisis management

Clear communication during and following a reputation crisis

Co-ordinated reputation crisis management

As expert social media lawyers for over 25 years, we offer instant in-house attendance to consider, advise and deploy legal advice, together with a healthy mix of rich experience and common sense. We work with Britain’s top communications and PR consultants who are well connected with the press and who assist us in deploying a quick and effective press response task whenever necessary.

Strategised approach to reputation crisis management

Moving away from a defensive to an advantageous position as fast as possible during times of reputation and crisis, also means a faster recovery and the opportunity to turn a crisis into progress. Legal advice must take this healthy approach into consideration. We believe that your focus must shift quickly away from the crisis to progress.

Clear communication during and following a reputation crisis

Naturally, a reputation crisis tends to throw systems and processes into chaos. Our job as reputation crisis lawyers is to help you straighten the lines quickly by replacing confusion with certainty. This often requires a clear, tailored, and strategic approach to communicating with clients, customers, your employees, and other stakeholders, such as investors, contractors, of course, the press.

During a reputation crisis, communications must be consistent and legally vetted to ensure avoiding creating confusion or prejudicing any legal process. Our lawyers are trained to deliver a fast, calm and well-considered communication approach in all circumstances.

How to handle PR and reputation crisis

The first defamation injunction case in the UK against Google search results and blogs

How to write an online review which is not defamatory

How to make a sensible decision whether to take legal action for libel

Suing for defamation after being cancelled

How to remove news articles about your court case from the internet

The first case where damages were awarded in both defamation and breach of data

What is Section 13 of the Defamation Act 2013

A full guide to Google disclosure requests

How to prevent becoming a victim of defamation by former employees and partners

How to remove a defamatory YouTube video

How dental clinics can effectively deal with fake and defamatory online reviews

Sending a pre-action protocol letter following a defamatory publication online 

Important factors to consider before taking legal action for defamation on the internet

Defamation against a company and defamation against directors

The case of removal of search results from Google worldwide 

Can you sue someone for spreading lies about you on the internet

What to do if you are falsely accused of rape on social media

Defamation on Twitter by an anonymous user

Harassment of teenagers on social media and at school

How to stop a UK harasser from harassing someone in another country

Legal advice on fake or defamatory online reviews

Fake and defamatory online reviews are often extremely damaging to local and to national businesses. Negative online reviews on websites such as TripAdvisor, are rather harmful to small and local businesses, whilst fake reviews on GlassDoor tend to have a major adverse impact on larger businesses and on start-ups.

Spotting fake online reviews

Unmasking the identity of internet users who post fake reviews

Removing defamatory online reviews from review websites

Taking posters of fake online reviews to court

Spotting fake online reviews

It is often difficult to prove that an online review is in fact fake. The business owner might know that a review is fake but getting the proof that might be not as straight forward. Having assisted hundreds of clients in relation to thousands of fake and defamatory online reviews, it is often our job to spot the characteristics of a fake online review and then produce the proof needed to show that a particular online review is fake.

Unmasking the identity of internet users who post fake reviews

One of the firm’s specialities is the unmasking of publishers of fake online reviews. We go about using IP addresses, cross referenced email addresses, linked email accounts, linked websites and other investigative tools to enable our clients to unmask the true identification of whoever is behind a fake, defamatory online review.

Removing defamatory online reviews from review websites

Often, our clients’ ultimate goal is to facilitate the removal of fake and defamatory online reviews. Our lawyers have so far removed thousands of defamatory online reviews from review websites all over the world. We are able to use judicial tools and strategies to facilitate removal of defamatory online reviews even from review websites that are located in the United States.

Taking posters of fake online reviews to court

In many cases, it transpires that the authors of the defamatory or fake online reviews are people known to our clients. Most likely these are competitors, former employees or disgruntled customers. Whilst removing the fake reviews from the review websites is important, holding authors of fake online reviews to account is often as important for our clients.

Defamation by investor case where a shareholder was held liable for defaming a company

A successful case of ICO right to be forgotten appeal

How to remove a defamatory fake reviews from TripAdvisor

How to remove fake reviews from TrustPilot

Legal support for website operators in the UK

Operators of websites in the UK could find themselves liable for various wrongdoings by virtue of operating a website, publishing posts, moderating posts, advertising goods and services or collecting users’ private information. It is important for website operators in the UK to understand their potential legal liabilities and to safeguard themselves against legal claims by internet users, by competitors or by regulatory and law enforcement bodies.

The law that governs the supply of services and the sale of goods online in the UK involves a variety of legal obligations, regulations and statutes from a number of areas of law. As your online start up business grows and develops, so will your legal and business needs, which are going to become more significant. In the event where you ever want to put your business up for sale, merger or acquisition, you will certainly want the legal foundations of your business to be solid strong and supported by an experienced legal team that will be supporting you throughout the process of growth.

Because all of our work is focused on the law of the internet, our lawyers are perfectly placed to assist and support operators of websites in the UK with matters of compliance with contacts, website terms and conditions, trading standard matters, anti-competition law, trademarks, online marketing, promotion and advertising laws. From the point of designing your new intent business, you should speak with one of our experienced internet lawyers who will become one of your best trusted advisors throughout the creation and the operation of your internet business.

Internet defamation lawyer

There are many defamation lawyers in London but there are only a handful who truly understand with clarity social media and the internet. It is often the case that the merits of your defamation case should be assessed by your lawyer through different angles and having a strong defamation case in law, is only one of them.

How to win a defamation case

Early action when responding to defamation

Why choose Cohen Davis defamation lawyers

How to win a defamation case

Before embarking on a full scale defamation case, which could lead to a glorious victory, but at the risk of  further dissemination of the defamatory statements through reporting by the press of the defamation proceedings, we will work with you on what winning your defamation case means to you. The internet is full of reputational risks and whilst it is possible to have them all supressed, winning a defamation claim on its own is often insufficient. This is particularly true if the defamation has spread, or is likely to be spread across websites, social media and jurisdictions. To truly win a defamation claim, you will need something more than your defamation lawyer’s strategy to win your defamation court case.

Some of the most recognised defamation solicitors and barristers in the UK will focus on winning your defamation case in court, but this wouldn’t necessarily mean that you “won” your defamation case. When it comes to defamation on the internet, your court case is one battle of many. Winning a defamation case is great, but often insufficient. There are other battles to be won and your defamation lawyer will plan your case so that each battle, with search engines, with social media companies and over public opinion is fought and won, hard and smart.

Early action when responding to defamation

When it comes to defamation on the internet, you can never tell for sure what those who wish you harm are up to. They might be planning and plotting, preparing and conspiring which means your defamation lawyer must be at least be one step ahead throughout your representation.

The sooner you seek the right legal advice, the better the outcome of your case is likely to be. When a team of dedicated defamation lawyers successfully prevents articles and internet posts appearing online in the first place, the credit for this success should be given to our intelligent clients who have the wisdom to act fast.

Why choose Cohen Davis defamation lawyers

We are outcome focused. It is too easy for a defamation lawyer to get carried away and perhaps forget about what the objective is all about. Vindications, apologies, payment of damages and defamation injunctions are instruments that your defamation lawyer could use to help you achieve your gaols. The pursue of a defamation case isn't to obtain a defamation injunction, for example, but to bring you a peace of mind and a satisfactory closure to an unpleasant ordeal.

An outcome focused approach, also means that we constantly look at ways to close any gaps that might end up undermining your achievements. An outcome focused approach also means that the solution must fit within your budget and that the strategy for winning your defamation case must be tailor planned for you and for your needs and abilities.

Finally, an outcome focused approach to winning defamation cases, means that we always assign the right defamation lawyer to meet the needs of your case. We make sure that only specialists and experienced defamation lawyers work on our clients’ cases and that the experience must be related to our clients’ current defamation issue.

Defamation solicitors with focus on internet and social media law

Is it possible to obtain defamation injunctions prior to publication

How to deal with fraudulent review websites

What to do if you need to uncover the identity of your internet troll

Alternatives to litigation in defamation cases

Are website operators in the UK responsible for comments posted on their website by third parties

Does SEO work to clear bad online reputation

How to choose a defamation lawyer

How to remove online reviews from review websites outside the UK

 Working together with your legal team to create effective online reputation strategies

What laws affect online businesses in the UK

How to respond to an online reputation attack

Slander and libel warning letter to the website operator

Legal advice about social media from an expert social media lawyer

Fake online reviews about restaurants legal advice

How to remove a review from Yelp.com

How to remove a business review from ReviewCentre

Social media lawyers and internet law specialists

What to do if your business is defamed on Google