Jurisdiction: Australia; historical case commentary. Reviewed 27 October 2026.
Online reviews can raise consumer-law and defamation questions, but those are different legal regimes. A platform cannot safely treat a business-written review as a customer’s independent view merely because the customer did not object.
Service Seeking
In July 2020 the Federal Court ordered Service Seeking to pay $600,000 in civil penalties. Its Fast Feedback feature allowed businesses to draft reviews and star ratings, then published them if the customer did not respond within three days. The ACCC reported about 21,000 reviews created through the feature, with about 17,000 automatically published without customer input. That is not a finding that 80% of every review on the entire site was fake.
Identification is not a defamation judgment
Kabbabe v Google [2020] FCA 126 concerned preliminary steps to identify a prospective respondent and serve proceedings. It was not a final finding that the disputed review was false or defamatory. Nor does it establish a universal rule requiring consent for every online comment.
Third-party comments
In Fairfax Media v Voller [2021] HCA 27, the High Court held the media companies were publishers of the third-party comments for the publication issue decided. That did not determine every element or defence of a final defamation claim. Current liability also requires checking applicable statutory provisions and later developments in the relevant jurisdiction.
For businesses and website operators
Publish authentic feedback, avoid misleading suppression or editing, and keep a clear moderation process. Respond to complaints and preserve relevant records. The lesson is careful review management, not literally never reading comments or assuming every negative review is unlawful.

Comments
Post a Comment