Nowadays, many of us look at reviews on the Internet before choosing a hotel, contractor or any other service. We even have a distrust of entrepreneurs who are not on Google Business or Facebook.
Indeed, it is an effective system to make understand our disapproval or appreciation of a company. On the other hand, a company cannot expect to have only positive reviews, because it is impossible to please everyone.
A dollar for a negative review
For example, in the area of law, a Vancouver lawyer received a dollar after suing a client who had left a negative review of her work. The client had marked that she was the worst lawyer in the world.
From our point of view, it is clear that the client should have exercised restraint in writing her review. She was clearly dissatisfied with having lost her file. However, it is unfortunately impossible to win all the files; the important thing is to give everything you can to win it.
The judge determined that the prosecution should never have taken place and that one cannot expect to have only positive opinions. Indeed, it is necessary to look with a criticism if the editor clearly has an intention to harm trade. In addition, it is important not to write a review about the blow of anger; the way you express your opinion will make all the difference to save you from problems.
Freedom of expression vs. respect for dignity
The ordinary citizen who receives a legal action or a formal notice will often remove his comment, not having the capacity to fight.
There are not many judgments in Quebec in this area. However, we believe that the right to freedom of expression may prevail, as long as the writer writes in a way that respects the institution. Indeed, the Quebec Charter and the Canadian Charter clearly guarantee freedom of expression, but they also provide for respect for dignity.
There is an important balance to be struck between its two fundamental rights. There is an important evolution that has taken place with the Internet and we are confident that judges will be able to find a happy medium. Normally, good faith is not a defence to defamation, but it is an aspect that can be assessed by the judge.
In a court of appeal case, the Honourable Justice France Thibault reiterated that the analysis must be done by taking a reasonable person in the same situation.
Defamation is defined as:
A communication of words or writings that cause someone to lose esteem or consideration or that still give rise to unfavourable or unpleasant feelings towards them.
As in any civil liability case, it must be established that the author of the defamatory remarks has committed a fault and that these remarks are indeed defamatory.
Our office is very much looking forward to seeing the first judgments related to Internet reviews and greatly hopes that freedom of expression will win when the writer is honest and respectful in what he or she says.
