Differences between fact and opinion: why it's crucial in reputation protection cases. An attorney's explanation.

In today's world, where information spreads at the speed of light, protecting business reputation, honor, and dignity is becoming increasingly vital. However, when a case reaches court, a key point is understanding the fundamental difference between a fact and an opinion. This distinction is a cornerstone in cases concerning the refutation of false information, as not every statement can be challenged in court.

Fact: what can be verified for truthfulness.

A fact is information containing specific data about events, phenomena, or actions, the truthfulness of which can be verified. For example: "Company X did not pay taxes for 2023," or "Person Y was convicted of theft."

Key characteristics of a fact:

Specificity: contains clear, measurable information.

Verifiability: can be checked for accuracy.

Objectivity: does not depend on personal attitude or emotions.

It is precisely false factual statements that undermine honor, dignity, or business reputation that are subject to legal protection. If the information is untrue and its dissemination has caused you harm, you have the right to demand its refutation.

Opinion: a viewpoint not subject to refutation

An opinion is a statement expressing a viewpoint, belief, perspective, critical remark, assumption, or assessment. For example: "Company X's actions were unprofessional," or "Person Y is incompetent."

Key characteristics of an opinion:

Subjectivity: reflects the speaker's personal attitude.

Impossibility of verification: its truthfulness cannot be proven or disproven.

Purely expressive form: often carries an emotional tone.

Important: Ukrainian legislation, including the Constitution of Ukraine and the Civil Code of Ukraine, guarantees the right to freedom of thought and speech. This means that opinions are not subject to refutation in court, as they are an exercise of this constitutional right. Even if an opinion is unpleasant or offensive, if it does not contain factual data, it cannot be refuted as false information.

Supreme Court Practice: differentiation is key to success/

The Supreme Court of Ukraine has repeatedly emphasized the importance of clearly distinguishing these concepts in reputation protection cases.

Facts subject to refutation: If disseminated information contains claims about certain facts that turned out to be false (e.g., an accusation of a crime that did not occur, or a claim of unpaid debts that were actually settled), then such information can be refuted.

Opinions not subject to refutation: If a statement is merely a subjective assessment (e.g., "this lawyer is bad," "the company's decision was wrong"), then, as a general rule, the court will not intervene, even if you disagree with it.

An exception applies when opinions are expressed in a crude, humiliating, or indecent form that goes beyond generally accepted moral norms. In such situations, although the essence of the opinion is not refuted, there may be a question of compensation for moral damages caused specifically by the form of expression.

Legal position of the Supreme Court:

In the Resolution of the Supreme Court of April 17, 2024, in case No. 205/1262/24 (proceeding No. 61-2130sv25), the Cassation Civil Court reaffirmed established practice. The Court stated that when deciding whether to recognize disseminated information as untrue, courts must determine the nature of such information and ascertain whether it is a factual statement or an opinion.

Also, in this resolution, the Supreme Court once again emphasized that a person who expresses not facts concerning the plaintiff, but their own views, critical statements, or assumptions, cannot be obliged to prove their truthfulness, as this constitutes a violation of the freedom of one's own viewpoint, which is recognized as a fundamental part of the right protected by Article 10 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

Why does this matter for your case?

A correct understanding of this distinction is critically important for forming an effective legal position:

For the plaintiff: it allows you to understand whether your claim for reputation protection has a legal perspective. Filing a lawsuit to refute an opinion is a waste of time and resources.

For the defendant: it helps build a defense by arguing that the disseminated information is merely a personal opinion, not a fact.

Do you need legal assistance?

Reputation protection cases are often complex, especially when information is disseminated online. If your reputation is at risk, or you have encountered the spread of false information that causes harm, contact experienced lawyers. We will help you correctly classify the information, gather evidence, and develop an effective strategy to protect your interests in court.

You might also find interesting: judicial protection of business reputation and refutation of false information.