Burden of Proof for Negative Factual Claims in Online Reviews
Anyone asserting negative facts to the detriment of a company in an online rating portal must prove their accuracy if challenged. If such proof is not provided, the affected company can demand the removal of the evaluation. This principle was recently clarified by the 6th Civil Chamber of the Frankenthal Regional Court.
The court ordered the author of a negative review to delete a specific damaging claim from their criticism.
The Case: Damage Claim in a Moving Company Review
A man from Mannheim had hired a moving company from Ludwigshafen. Following the service, he posted a review on an online rating platform, giving the company only one out of five stars.
In his review, he claimed that a piece of furniture was damaged during transport. Furthermore, he alleged that no one had taken responsibility for repairing the damage. The owner of the moving company, however, denied any damage occurred and viewed the customer's claims as harmful to his company's reputation.
Court's Ruling: Distinguishing Fact from Opinion in Online Reviews
In its ruling, the chamber upheld the entrepreneur’s claim. It found that the customer’s negative statement on the online rating portal was indeed detrimental to the moving company owner.
This finding was balanced against the customer’s fundamental right to express their opinion about the service received. However, the court emphasized a crucial distinction: the disputed statement that a piece of furniture was damaged was not a protected opinion. Instead, it constituted a statement of fact, describing an event alleged to have actually happened.
Such factual claims only need to be accepted by the rated company if their truthfulness is established. Therefore, in the event of a dispute, the party making a factual assertion in an online review bears the burden of proof for its accuracy. The Chamber concluded that the customer had failed to provide this proof, leading it to grant the company's action for an injunction in this specific regard.
Conclusion
The judgment highlights the critical importance of substantiating factual claims in online reviews. While freedom of expression is protected, defamatory factual statements without proof can lead to legal action and removal. This ruling provides clarity for both businesses and consumers regarding their rights and responsibilities in the digital review landscape.