Tripadvisor: defamation charges for those who post fake reviews

The offence is committed of defamation for anyone who accuses hotel staff of being rude, including the manager, even if the latter was not present on the day in question. Nor does the application of the law on the particularly minor nature of the offence, which allows one to go unpunished and avoids having to pay compensation for damages – albeit reduced if the judge considers the offence to be minor – The Court of Cassation thus upheld, solely with regard to the amount of compensation, the appeal against the order to pay, for having called the manager of a hotel and his entire staff ‘rude’, as they were ‘guilty’ of demanding payment for breakfast rather than including it in the room rate.

A treatment about which the customer had vented online. The guest at the establishment had immediately set out their complaint in writing on  Tripadvisor a review negative in which he branded the hotel staff as rude, starting with the manager, who was, however, absent that day. The appellant’s appeal to the right to criticise, but the judges reminded him that this cannot be separated from the truth of the matter, which must be understood in a strictly formal sense. And the manager’s absence was verified.

Nor is there any merit in the evidence suggesting that it was the general manager who instructed the receptionist to charge the breakfast to the account. The only point in the claimant’s favour concerns the amount of compensation to be awarded to the defamed party, which the Court had set at 3,000 euros. However, the appeal judge should have reduced this figure, taking into account the application of the rule regarding the particularly minor nature of the offence which, as the Supreme Court points out, does not exempt the defendant from paying compensation.