Can Publishing A Review On Social Media Be Defamatory?

Since the arrival of social media, publicly expressing an opinion has taken on a whole new dimension. The potential audience for online expressions of an opinion is vast, and companies are now paying close attention to comments published about them online. In some cases, the popular verdict can be devastating.

Businesses sometimes have to go to court when they feel victimized by defamatory and baseless statements about them online. That was the case in the recent matter of École de conduite Hermès v. Dubé, 2017 QCCQ 128941, in which a Facebook user was ordered to pay the plaintiff $3,800.

* * *

I - Facts

The plaintiff, Pascal Leyris, is the owner of driving school École de conduite Hermès. Before starting that business, he was an instructor at another driving school, Permis Plus. Relations between the plaintiff and Permis Plus had been highly acrimonious since the plaintiff started his own business.

Several members of the family of the defendant, Charli Dubé, aged 18, were shareholders of Permis Plus. They accused the plaintiff of soliciting clients of their driving school.

Even though he did not know the plaintiff personally, the defendant published a "review" of him on the Facebook page of the plaintiff's driving school. He gave the business one star (out of a possible five) and insinuated in his comments that the plaintiff behaved inappropriately with some of his teenage clients2. The post was withdrawn the following day, at the plaintiff's request.

The plaintiff claimed $7,500 from the defendant for defaming him. The defendant maintained that the language he had used was not defamatory and had not damaged the plaintiff's reputation.

II - Decision

1. Defendant's liability

   The Court considered that the "review" published by the defendant was defamatory, primarily because of the outlandish insinuations it contained and the doubts it unjustly raised about the plaintiff's character and behaviour.

   Citing the Supreme Court of Canada3, the Court pointed out that in order to determine if the plaintiff was defamed, it must be asked "whether an ordinary person would believe that the remarks made, when viewed as a whole, brought discredit on the reputation of [the plaintiff ...] because of the idea they expressly convey, or by the insinuations that may be inferred from them".

   The Court found that the statements published by the defendant contained falsehoods and fabrications, and that some of the terms used inherently discredited the plaintiff and...