Impersonating someone and sharing false content via fake social media accounts can give rise to defamation claims. Here, there are three main components to consider:
- A defamatory statement being published to at least one third party
- The statement identifies or refers to the claimant
- The statement is false, or cannot be justified as true
A claimant must also prove they suffered serious harm, showing real life consequences from the defamatory actions. This could include harassment, altered employment situations like being demoted or fired, or worse co-worker relationships.
The Online Safety Act 2023 replaces the Communications Act 2003 with a new crime for sending false communications: it is now illegal to knowingly send a communication with the intent to cause significant emotional, psychological, or physical harm. This provision specifically targets online misinformation intended to harm individuals. The new laws are also imposed on social media platforms as well as public bodies, and requires them to take a proactive role in addressing illegal content. Such changes include increasing accessibility and responsiveness in reporting illegal content, and heightened cooperation between the platforms and public bodies.
Should the perpetrator be identified, claimants have the option to pursue civil action, seeking compensation for reputational damage and a court order to remove or rectify any false statements. It is also possible for English courts to grant an injunction to stop publication of the defamatory content.
To unmask the perpetrator, Norwich Pharmacal orders can be used to compel third parties to reveal any pertinent details. Courts in England and Wales are empowered to direct social media platforms to provide personal data of specific individuals, aiding their identification for subsequent legal actions. However the following three conditions must be fulfilled:
- There must have been a wrongful act by an unknown wrongdoer (in this case: defamation)
- There is no alternative way for the claimant to proceed without the third party’s disclosure of the perpetrator’s personal information
- The third party’s platform was used for the wrongdoing, but the third party had not done anything wrong in the specific situation
The privacy policies of many companies require them to protect user data as a priority in most circumstances, so a Norwich Pharmacal order is usually the most straightforward method in obtaining personal information about the perpetrator.
If you need advice or assistance on defamation matters, please contact Nath Solicitors on 0203 983 8278 or get in touch with the firm online.