Defamation Lawsuit for False Online Reviews in the Philippines
All There is to Know: Legal Framework, Processes, and Practical Considerations

1. Introduction

Online reviews have become a powerful source of information for consumers in the Philippines. A single negative review can heavily influence a business’s reputation, impacting sales and client perception. While online reviews are often protected as free speech or fair comment, they can cross legal boundaries if they contain false, defamatory statements. In such cases, a person or entity may file a lawsuit to seek remedies under Philippine law.

This article provides an overview of the legal framework on defamation—specifically “libel” in the Philippines—when it comes to false online reviews, how such cases are handled, potential defenses, and practical considerations for both complainants and defendants.

2. Philippine Legal Framework on Defamation

2.1 Defamation Under the Revised Penal Code

Definition of Libel (Article 353, Revised Penal Code)
Under Philippine law, libel is defined as “a public and malicious imputation of a crime, or of a vice or defect, real or imaginary, or any act, omission, condition, status, or circumstance tending to cause dishonor, discredit, or contempt of a natural or juridical person.”
Elements of Libel
To establish libel under the Revised Penal Code, four elements must be present:
- Imputation of a discreditable act or condition: A statement that harms the reputation of another by imputing a crime, vice, defect, or dishonorable condition.
- Publication: The statement must be communicated to a third person. In the online environment, posting on social media, blogs, or review platforms generally satisfies this element.
- Identity of the person defamed: The person or entity being referred to must be identifiable, though not necessarily named explicitly, if the context allows the audience to determine who is being talked about.
- Malice: Under the law, malice is presumed when the statement is defamatory unless it falls under privileged communication. “Actual malice” can be proven by showing knowledge of the statement’s falsity or reckless disregard for the truth.
Penalties under the Revised Penal Code
Libel is punishable by imprisonment or a fine, depending on the court’s determination. A conviction for libel can carry a prison term ranging from minimum periods (arresto mayor) to longer periods (prisión correccional), and/or a fine.

2.2 Cyber Libel under the Cybercrime Prevention Act (RA 10175)

Cyber Libel Defined
Republic Act No. 10175 (Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012) explicitly criminalizes libel committed through a “computer system” or any other similar means which may be devised in the future. This includes social media postings, online review platforms, and other digital communications.
Penalty for Cyber Libel
The penalty for cyber libel is typically one degree higher than traditional libel. Courts often impose fines, prison terms, or both, depending on the circumstances.
Key Supreme Court Ruling (Disini v. Secretary of Justice, 2014)
In this landmark case, the Supreme Court clarified the constitutionality of the cyber libel provision in RA 10175. The Court upheld the criminalization of online libel but made it clear that only the original author of a defamatory post could be held liable, not those who simply react or comment (unless they add new defamatory content).

3. When Does a False Online Review Become Defamatory?

Factual Assertions vs. Opinions
- Factual assertions that are false and damaging to someone’s reputation may be actionable. For instance, claiming that a restaurant has “serious health code violations” when it does not can be defamatory if done maliciously.
- Opinions, criticisms, or fair commentary are generally protected under the right to free speech. Saying “I didn’t like the food” or “service was poor” is typically considered an opinion unless it includes provably false statements.
Public Figure vs. Private Person
Under Philippine law, there is no sharp distinction between public figures and private persons regarding libel. However, public figures (e.g., celebrities, politicians) are more prone to public criticism, and proving malice might require a slightly higher threshold. Private persons or private businesses, on the other hand, are generally afforded more protection due to the presumption of malice.
Impact of Social Media Platforms
False statements published on social media or review websites (e.g., Google Reviews, Facebook, TripAdvisor, etc.) can easily reach a wide audience. This element of “publication” can be met simply by hitting the “post” or “publish” button.

4. Filing a Defamation Lawsuit in the Philippines

Initial Steps: Private Complaint or Police Report
The aggrieved party (business owner or individual) can begin by filing a complaint with the local prosecutor’s office. In many cases, the offended party might lodge a police report first or consult an attorney who will draft a complaint affidavit detailing how the statement was false and defamatory.
Preliminary Investigation
The Office of the City or Provincial Prosecutor conducts a preliminary investigation to determine “probable cause.”
- Submission of Evidence: The complainant submits proof of the statement’s falsity and how it harmed their reputation (e.g., screenshots, records of lost business, witness affidavits).
- Counter-Affidavit: The respondent (the person who posted the review) has the opportunity to file a counter-affidavit, asserting defenses like truth, lack of malice, or that the statement was an opinion or fair comment.
Information or Dismissal
If the prosecutor finds probable cause, an Information (formal charge) is filed in court. Otherwise, the complaint is dismissed.
Arraignment and Trial
- Arraignment: The respondent (now the accused) is formally presented with the charges in court.
- Trial: Evidence is presented by both parties. The judge determines whether there is proof beyond reasonable doubt to convict for criminal defamation.
Judgment and Remedies
- Criminal Penalties: The court may impose imprisonment, fine, or both for libel or cyber libel.
- Civil Damages: A defamation lawsuit can include claims for damages (e.g., moral damages, nominal damages, exemplary damages). An acquittal in the criminal case does not bar a separate civil action for damages if the act caused injury.

5. Defenses Against Defamation Claims

Truth
A statement that is factually true, and published with good motives and justifiable ends, generally negates malice.
Fair Comment
Honest opinions on matters of public interest, especially about the quality of goods or services, may be protected if grounded in fact.
Lack of Malice
If the respondent can prove that there was no malicious intent (actual or presumed), the charge of libel may fail.
Privileged Communication
Some statements made in the context of official duties or reports—such as those under oath in a legislative inquiry—may be considered privileged. However, general online reviews usually do not fall under this category.
Consent
If the complainant consented to the publication of the statement or waived the right to sue, this could be a defense. Though rare in the context of false reviews, it might arise if there was an agreement allowing negative feedback in exchange for something else.

6. Potential Liabilities of Online Platforms

Platform vs. Content Creator
Philippine jurisprudence generally targets the individual poster for defamation, not the platform itself, unless the platform actively participates or assists in publishing the defamatory statement.
Takedown Requests
Aggrieved parties often request platforms to remove defamatory content. While not always legally mandated, platforms with content moderation policies may remove posts that violate their guidelines or upon receiving a valid legal order.

7. Practical Considerations

Evidence Preservation
For businesses or individuals who believe they have been defamed, it is crucial to preserve evidence. Take screenshots or printouts of the review, gather witness statements, and compile any relevant documentation.
Mitigating Damages
Before initiating a legal case, it is sometimes beneficial to attempt an amicable resolution. A demand letter requesting a retraction or apology may resolve the issue quickly, mitigate damages, and save on litigation costs.
Filing Deadlines (Prescriptive Periods)
- Under traditional libel, the prescriptive period (time within which to file a case) is generally one year from publication.
- For cyber libel under RA 10175, the Supreme Court has held that the prescriptive period is 12 years from the time of posting.
Cost and Complexity
Libel cases can be lengthy and potentially expensive. Court dockets in the Philippines are often congested, so parties should be prepared for a protracted trial if settlement is not reached.
Impact of Criminal Charges
A criminal libel conviction can carry a prison term, which means the stakes are high. Respondents should consult legal counsel immediately upon receiving a complaint.

8. Conclusion

False online reviews that damage a person’s or a business’s reputation can lead to a defamation (libel) lawsuit in the Philippines. Both the Revised Penal Code and the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 provide avenues for legal redress, imposing criminal and potentially civil liabilities on the authors of malicious, false statements. At the same time, the law protects genuine opinions and fair comment, ensuring that not all negative remarks rise to the level of libel.

Key Takeaways:

Always verify factual claims before posting negative reviews online.
Businesses and individuals should preserve evidence (screenshots, etc.) and seek legal advice if they believe they have been defamed.
Attempting a private resolution—such as a demand letter or retraction request—may be a prudent first step to avoid the costs of litigation.
The law imposes stiff penalties for cyber libel, reflecting the seriousness with which Philippine courts treat online defamation.

In all cases, consulting with a qualified lawyer is essential for anyone considering filing or defending a defamation lawsuit. The nuances of Philippine defamation law, especially regarding malice and publication in the digital space, are complex and require a careful, fact-specific legal strategy.