Plumbing company awarded €40k for defamation in online review

Status
Not open for further replies.
Brendan Burgess

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
54,891
www.irishtimes.com

Damages award to Dublin firm over online review should make people ‘think twice’ before ‘venting’ online, says internet law expert

More cases likely over critical reviews after €40,000 damages awarded in ‘hugely significant’ case
www.irishtimes.com www.irishtimes.com

A €40,000 damages award against a Dublin man who posted a defamatory review online of a plumbing company is “hugely significant” and should make people “think twice” before posting critical reviews, an internet law expert has warned.

He described as hugely significant, the “first of its kind”, a recent High Court decision where a man was ordered to pay €40,000 to Stillorgan Gas Heating and Plumbing Ltd, based in Dun Laoghaire, over critical reviews of a boiler installation.

James Manning, of Castleside Drive, Rathfarnham, Dublin, was found to have defamed the company in four reviews he posted in February 2022 on the Trustpilot review website and the firm’s Google maps review page. Two of the reviews, which included untrue references to the firm such as “con men”, were removed after 24 hours, and two were removed after four days.

The case, Mr O’Doherty ( barrister and law lecturer) said, illustrates that people should think twice before “venting” online. It is significant that the damages were awarded against the poster, not the publisher, and people may be unaware how much a critical review may cost them, he said.

There is no difficulty with a negative review expressing truthful criticism, the problem is when people go beyond the truth and “go over the top” in their criticisms and use defamatory words like “crooks”, “chancers” or shysters” that they cannot stand over, he said.
 
I do think this is an extreme case - using the words "con men" or "crook" is definitely libel.

However I don't think you could get sued for saying someone is a "chancer" if you gave examples of poor evasive customer service?

I wonder is there a bit of Streisand effect here - people will see they sued over a negative review but will remember the negative review and avoid?
 
T McGibney said:
Nobody with any sense pays any heed to crank reviews.
Click to expand...
If i googled the company now, I'd see a court case, "con men", negative review and likely decide to try elsewhere.

If I had googled them prior to it I may not have seen the review itself, or compared it to all of the glowing reviews listed as well and balanced it up.

Streisand effect.
 
I like the idea of a company that is happy to assertively defend its own good name and that of ifs work.

This incident won't do them a blind bit of harm..
 
Last edited:
Towger said:
Exactly my thoughts. The review was only up for a few days, probably not even seen by a potential customer.
Click to expand...
It was removed because the company took action, not because the person who posted it changed their mind. There are other companies who have been taking a similar approach to negative reviews for many years who continue to do very well.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top