Basics of protecting honour, dignity, and business reputation

In such conditions, no one can be completely insured against slander, humiliation of honour and dignity, or the spread of inaccurate information. However, current legislation provides legal mechanisms that enable the restoration of rights and interests that have been violated.

Below, we will look at ways to protect your honour, dignity, and business reputation.

Pre-trial protection

To protect your honour, dignity, and business reputation, it is not necessary to immediately go to court. It is often effective to contact the authors of the content themselves or file a complaint with the relevant platforms, for example, regarding a publication on Instagram.

If the social network reviews a complaint and determines that the post violates its standards, it will remove the publication from the platform.. Moreover, it is well known that the more users file complaints about violations of community rules, the higher the chances of the publication being removed.

At the same time, there are many known examples when third-party users, or the person about whom the inaccurate information was spread, contacted the authors of the relevant posts, and the latter simply refuted or deleted it.

However, the out-of-court protection procedure does not provide for any compensation for the damage caused. Therefore, if a person intends to receive material compensation, it is worth considering the possibility of initiating a legal dispute.

Legal protection

It should be noted that legal proceedings may not always bring a positive result, as many factors need to be taken into account.

When filing a lawsuit to protect honour, dignity, and business reputation (defamation disputes), it is necessary to take into account the following mandatory elements that must be proven in order to satisfy the requirements for refuting inaccurate information.

1. Dissemination of information. The plaintiff must prove that at least one person has seen/heard the information.

The dissemination of information is defined as the publication of information in the press, broadcast on radio, television, or using other means of mass media; dissemination on the Internet or using other means of telecommunications; presentation in characteristics, statements, letters addressed to other persons; communication in public speeches, on electronic networks, and in other forms to at least one person.

At the same time, national courts adhere to the opinion that information disseminated via the Internet is intended for an unlimited circle of persons and is therefore considered mass information. In other words, it has already been brought to the attention of at least one person.

To prove the fact of dissemination of inaccurate information, relevant evidence is usually submitted to the court together with the statement of claim: screenshots of publications, video and audio recordings, copies of Internet articles, etc. That is, any material evidence that the information has become available to third parties.

2. Identification of the person. The inaccurate information must directly or indirectly relate to the plaintiff.

Information that, in the plaintiff’s opinion, violates their honour, dignity, or business reputation must contain an indication of the person’s identification data. This may be a direct indication of the position, along with the employee’s name, the person’s full name, or a clear reference to the person’s social media accounts, etc.

In particular, in case No. 757/26089/18-ц, the defendant did not specifically refer to the plaintiff, but referred to “the lawyers of a certain person.” As a result, the court assessed this as a generalized concept rather than a reference to the plaintiff, and therefore dismissed the claim.

3. Inaccuracy. Evidence is needed to prove that the information disseminated is untrue.

One of the most important criteria for satisfying such claims is proving that the information disseminated is inaccurate. In each case, the plaintiff must gather evidence confirming that the information that has become public is untrue. Depending on the situation, evidence may include: documents; written testimony; expert opinions; official information from authorities; materials from other reliable sources, etc.

In such cases, courts pay attention to the fact that the burden of proving the inaccuracy of the information lies with the plaintiff.

4. Humiliation of honour, dignity or business reputation. The information has inaccurate (negative) content that humiliates the honour, dignity or business reputation of the plaintiff.

Equally important is the violation of a person’s personal non-property rights. In particular, this refers to inaccurate information that has a negative impact on a person’s honour, dignity, or business reputation.

As a general rule, inaccurate information in any case affects the moral and psychological state of the plaintiff. Therefore, in such disputes, a claim for moral damages is usually also filed.

Case law shows high requirements for the evidence base, so successful proof of a violation of rights in court requires careful preparation.

Key aspects of court proceedings

In addition to the basic requirements for establishing humiliation of honour, dignity, or business reputation, case law highlights a number of important aspects that directly affect the prospects for the consideration of the case.

These aspects often become decisive in determining whether the claim will be satisfied, as well as the extent to which the court will uphold the plaintiff’s rights.

• Distinction between “evaluative judgment” and “factual statement”

The courts have repeatedly emphasized the need for a clear distinction between the concepts of “factual statement” and “evaluative judgment.”

The difference is that a “factual statement” is a report of events or circumstances that can be verified for truthfulness. In turn, an “evaluative judgment” is the personal opinion of the author of the information, an assessment or impression that cannot be proven to be true or false. The requirement to prove the truthfulness of evaluative judgments is unenforceable and violates freedom of expression as such.

Let us illustrate the difference between these concepts with an example for better understanding.

A publication on a news website with the following content: “Lastivka LLC has been evading taxes for three years” is a clear factual statement. It can be verified: are there any court decisions, documents from the tax authorities, ongoing proceedings, etc. And if this information is not true, it can be deemed inaccurate, and a retraction can be demanded.

Now let’s take another example: “In my opinion, Lastivka LLC is behaving unethically and violating the law because it does not maintain a transparent tax reporting policy.”

Yes, this is an evaluative judgment. A person expresses their opinion and explains why they think so. There are no clear facts that can be verified, and therefore nothing to refute. Such cases are protected by the right to freedom of expression.

However, there are cases when it is really difficult to determine from the content of a publication whether it is a factual statement or an evaluative judgment. In such situations, it is advisable to consult experts for a semantic and textual analysis.

• Broader limits of acceptable criticism of public figures

There is currently a rather interesting situation with plaintiffs who are media (public) figures, including politicians. According to the case law of the European Court of Human Rights and national courts, public figures and civil servants must be prepared for an increased level of criticism, including in a rude form. The courts believe that public figures must be prepared for greater public scrutiny and increased interest in their activities and personal lives. The courts also note that by choosing a career as a public figure, they have agreed to such attention.

In other words, the limits of permissible criticism of public figures are significantly broader than those applicable to ordinary individuals.

• Determination of the proper defendant(s)

The defendants in such cases are the individuals who disseminated the inaccurate information. For example, the owner of the website and the author of the information.

In practice, there are fewer problems with the author of the publications, since in most cases the publication is made on behalf of a specific person, and this can be established. For example, the author of a Facebook post or a journalist who wrote an article.

However, problems may arise with regard to the website owner. According to the Law of Ukraine “On Copyright and Related Rights,” the website owner is the person who owns the account and establishes the terms and conditions of use of the website.

In order to establish the owner of a website, as a general rule, the Subsidiary Enterprise “Competence Center for Internet Address Space” of the Consortium “Ukrainian Center for Number and Address Support” is contacted.

The Supreme Court has repeatedly emphasized that a reference from the above-mentioned Subsidiary is proper and admissible evidence.

• Compensation for moral damages

Compensation for moral damages is a common measure in disputes over the protection of honour, dignity, and business reputation.

Moral damages are recognized as suffering caused to a person as a result of physical or psychological impact, which led to the deterioration or deprivation of the plaintiff’s ability to realize their habits and desires, deterioration of relations with others, and other negative consequences of a moral nature. The amount of moral damages is determined by the court depending on the nature and extent of the suffering (physical, emotional, mental, etc.), the nature of non-property losses (their duration, possibility of recovery, etc.), and taking into account other circumstances.

However, assessing moral damages is a rather complex process, and, in most cases, the amount of compensation depends directly on the court’s discretion. Courts rarely satisfy claims for full compensation for moral damages, usually reducing the amount of compensation to between 5,000 and 20,000 hryvnias.

Post-trial protection

It should be noted that the existence of a court decision does not necessarily lead to the effective restoration of violated rights. Even after receiving a positive court decision, the plaintiff may encounter problems with its enforcement.

Court decisions in Ukraine are binding throughout the country. However, in practice, there are cases of deliberate disregard of court decisions, especially in cases involving the refutation of inaccurate information.

Failure to comply with court decisions may result in non-compliant parties being held liable, including criminal liability.

At the same time, there are also positive examples of conscientious enforcement. For example, a news outlet Ukrainska Pravda, in compliance with the decision in case No. 757/51210/18-ц, published a refutation of inaccurate information about Artur Yemelianov in accordance with the operative part of the court decision, posting it on its website under the headline “Refutation of inaccurate information about Artur Stanislavovich Yemelianov.”

Thus, the protection of violated rights in defamation disputes can be achieved either out of court or by filing a lawsuit in court. Still, the procedure for proving the circumstances set out in the claim is quite complex and, in most cases, depends on the subjective assessment of the court. However, for a claim to be upheld, it is always necessary to pay attention to four criteria: proving the fact of dissemination of inaccurate information, the connection of such information with a person, its inaccuracy, and the humiliation of honour, dignity, or business reputation.