Trustpilot reviews of law firm defamatory, judge rules

The Law Society gazette reports

debt recovery firm is taking legal action against the review website Trustpilot in relation to 20 different reviews left which include allegations of fraud and harassment.

BW Legal Services Limited, which is regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and Solicitors Regulation Authority, is suing for libel over the comments posted between February 2020 and January 2021.

The action – one of the first cases where a firm has brought proceedings against a review site – came to light in a judgment following a hearing last May. Mrs Justice Tipples DBE went through each of the 20 reviews in turn to establish their meaning, and made clear that the court was not, at this stage, adjudicating on any other issue. The defendant, a Danish company which owns and operates the Trustpilot website, has not yet been required to file a defence.

The court heard that the first review referred to the firm as ‘absolute liars’ and an ‘absolute disgrace’, with the firm submitting that it had been accused of harassing a client and falsifying transcripts of telephone recordings to deceive the SRA. The firm said that ‘at the heart of this review’ was an unequivocal allegation of dishonesty.

The defendant suggested there was nothing in the review which could be understood that the firm had harassed a customer. Allegations concerning the firm’s imputed intentions were ‘unsustainable’, Trustpilot said.

The Trustpilot website displayed on a phone screen

A Danish company which owns and operates the Trustpilot website has not yet been required to file a defence

Source: Alamy

Further reviews referred to the firm as ‘total scumbags’ and later as a ‘legal vile robo firm of solicitors’ who relied on ‘bullying tactics’ to force people pay penalty notices.

The firm maintained that the defendant presented information to users on the Trustpilot website as a trusted source of information in relation to those companies or organisations that it profiles, and that was endorsed by the use of the word ‘Trust’ in its name.

Trustpilot submitted that the natural and ordinary meaning of each statement contended for by the firm was ‘far removed’ from how the ordinary reasonable user of the site would understand the reviews. In particular, the claimant’s pleaded meanings adopted an ‘overly lawyerly’ analysis of the reviews.

The judge said each review’s meaning was defamatory at common law and consisted of a mixture of statement of fact and expressions of opinion.

She added: ‘The Trustpilot website is an open platform on which anyone can write a review of their experience of the claimant and, in doing so, rate the claimant’s performance. They do so in their own words and the language used, and the tone of that language, will no doubt reflect the quality of that experience.

Read more at  https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/practice/trustpilot-reviews-of-law-firm-defamatory-judge-rules-/5114948.article?utm_source=gazette_newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=TrustPilot+law+firm+reviews+defamatory+%7c+Solicitor+rebuked+for+%27lewd+gesture%27+%7c+SRA+can%27t+fight+organised+crime_01%2f27%2f2023