Defamation claims

What is happening

A trade publication has run a piece about the company citing anonymous sources, and the editors have refused to publish a reply. The piece is being quoted, and counterparties have started raising it in negotiations.

A competitor is writing to your clients to say that your licence has been withdrawn or that you are under investigation, and is attaching "evidence". Alongside a defamation claim, this raises a question of unfair competition.

The company has suffered real losses since the publication: a tender fell through, the bank reduced a facility, a major client left. The owner wants damages as well as a retraction, and that means proving causation.

What the law says

• The claim rests on Article 152 of the Civil Code. The court examines three things: that the defendant disseminated the information, that it is damaging, and that it is untrue. If any one of them is not established, the claim fails.
• The claimant proves dissemination and damaging character; the defendant has to prove the information is true. In practice, the main battle is usually over whether a phrase is a statement of fact or the author's opinion.
• Business reputation disputes arising from commercial activity are heard by the commercial (arbitrazh) court under the Commercial Procedure Code (APK). A director's personal claim to protect their honour and dignity goes to a court of general jurisdiction under the Code of Civil Procedure.
• A company cannot claim compensation for non-pecuniary (moral) harm, but it can recover losses caused by the dissemination. Their amount and their link to the publication have to be shown by documents, not by general statements about lost trust.
• Under the Civil Code, limitation generally does not apply to claims to protect business reputation, while a claim for damages is subject to the ordinary three-year period. Delay is still unwise: evidence fades, and losses become harder to link to the publication.
• Where a competitor is behind the statements, a parallel complaint to the competition authority is possible: Federal Law No. 135-FZ of 26 July 2006 "On Protection of Competition" prohibits unfair competition by discreditation.

What we do

• We review the evidence: notarial inspection records, information on the site owner, witnesses to the dissemination and the underlying documents.
• We identify the defendants (the author, the media outlet and its founder, the site owner) and the court that will hear the case.
• We commission a linguistic analysis where the nature of the statements is disputed, and prepare questions in case the court orders an expert examination.
• We draft the claim with precise relief: which statements to declare untrue, where and in what form the retraction should appear, and what must be removed.
• We calculate losses and support them with documents where the company seeks damages.
• We apply for interim measures where there is a risk of further dissemination before judgment.
• We represent the company at first instance, on appeal and in cassation, and oversee enforcement of the judgment.

What we will need from you

• The notarial inspection record or, if there is none yet, dated links and screenshots.
• Documents showing the true position on each statement being challenged.
• Any correspondence with the author, the editors or the platform.
• Evidence of consequences: letters from counterparties, refusals, terminated contracts, and financial data for calculating losses.
• Constitutional documents and a power of attorney to conduct the case.