Skip to main content
Legally Insightful

Everyday Law Insights

Online Reviews, Consumer Law and Defamation Cases

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.

Boarded window with a headline about a business publishing its own customer reviews

Sources and further reading

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

ASIC's $678 Million Super Warning, ANZ's $7.59 Billion Profit and the AI Inflation Twist

ASIC's $678 Million Super Warning, ANZ's $7.59 Billion Profit and the AI Inflation Twist Legally Insightful | Tuesday, 10 November 2026 | Australian law, finance, technology and consumer affairs A superannuation sales funnel can move hundreds of millions of dollars. A bank can announce a multibillion-dollar profit and still worry about customers under pressure. And artificial intelligence might make things more expensive before it makes them cheaper. Those are three of the more revealing findings from Monday, 9 November. Add Google's warning that Australia's proposed online-safety law could affect teenagers' access to Gmail, a new stage of open banking, and two international consumer-law developments, and there is plenty to unpack. The important theme is not simply that regulators are busy. It is that the details matter: who is actually providing financial advice, whether a profitability measure has a fair comparison, when a new legal obligation commences, and...
Post a Comment
Read more

Ten Tips for In-House Lawyers Navigating Change

Jurisdiction: General career commentary. Reviewed 27 October 2026. These ten tips are general career suggestions, not guarantees about employment or professional obligations. Apply them alongside your duties of independence, confidentiality and competence. Get accustomed to change. The economy can be unpredictable, and the good times never last. It's essential to be vigilant and prepare for tough times, whether self-inflicted or imposed by external forces. Embrace uncertainty as an opportunity and consider what steps you will take if things go sideways. Review your priorities during difficult times. Ask what work needs urgent attention, where the business faces material risk, what your colleagues need from legal, and which tasks can reasonably wait. These are practical prompts, rather than a proven formula for career success. Maintain a sense of humor. Humor is an essential tool that can help you keep a positive outlook during even the most challenging situations. It is important t...
Post a Comment
Read more

Trade Mark Classes in Australia: How to Choose

Jurisdiction: Australia. Reviewed 27 October 2026. A trade mark application must identify the goods and services for which the mark will be used. The Nice Classification provides 45 classes: 1–34 cover goods and 35–45 cover services. Class numbers help organise applications; selecting a number alone does not secure all goods or services in that class. Choose the actual goods and services Start with what your business supplies and use IP Australia’s classification tools to select accurate terms. A business may need several classes: selling goods and providing delivery, retail or software services can involve different claims. Once filed, you generally cannot add new goods or services to expand the application; a new application may be needed. Examples, not a complete specification Cosmetics are commonly in class 3, downloadable software in class 9, clothing in class 25, advertising services in class 35 and legal services in class 45. These examples are not a substitute for checking the ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Education, with context. Legally Insightful provides general educational information about law and finance. It does not take your individual circumstances into account and is not a substitute for advice from an appropriately qualified legal, financial or tax professional. Check the publication date and relevant jurisdiction before relying on information. Investing involves risk, including loss of capital; past performance does not guarantee future results.