Signature Clinic Defamation Settlements – What are the Limits of Online Defamation Laws?
From Trustpilot to TripAdvisor, and from Facebook to Amazon – online reviews are now a crucial marketing tool. Great when the reviews are positive. Not so good for a business when online feedback is negative.
Customers and consumers have the freedom to express genuine views on a service they’ve received – warts and all. But there are limits, and the law offers protection against defamation, harassment, malicious falsehood and misuse of private information.
At the same time however, businesses can’t be overzealous about using defamation laws to chase down online criticism. Online reviews and social media commentary may well be commercially damaging to a business. However, if the reviews are the expression of legitimately held views, great caution should be taken before mounting any kind of legal action in response.
The Signature Clinic cases from 2024 are a good illustration of this. We discuss the case below.
Nath Solicitors offers specialist advice on defamation and harassment law to both claimants and defendants. For more information, please contact Shubha Nath on 44 (0) 203 983 8278.
Why Did Signature Clinic Claim Defamation?
Signature Medical Limited runs a chain of cosmetic clinics across the UK. it responded to critical reviews on Trustpilot and Facebook by suing the posters (four former clients) for defamation and harassment. Signature argued that the reviews were published maliciously and caused serious commercial damage.
The clinic pointed out that it is a reputable business – carrying out 7,000 cosmetic procedures each year and having treated more than 20,000 patients.
In short, the clinic believed it was entitled to protect ‘the goodwill in its name and its business reputation as an asset of value’.
The defendants got support from the Free Speech Union, the free speech lobby group. It launched a crowdfunding page to raise funds for legal fees. The defendants’ lawyers argued that the cases were in effect ‘SLAPPS’, or Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation –a blatant attempt by Signature Clinic to stifle criticism of its services.
Signature Clinic strongly denied their claims were SLAPPs.
Signature Clinic Ltd settles defamation cases out of court
In July 2024 the defamation cases brought by the cosmetic clinic chain were settled out of court (one case of harassment is ongoing). The cases had generated significant media attention in December 2023 when they were first brought, with one newspaper reporting the defendant’s claims that they felt ‘intimidated’ by the legal action and that the law was being used by the clinic to ‘silence critics’. The company was reported to have told one of the defendants in the action that the prospect of fear and imprisonment should ‘stop her itchy fingers online’.
The terms of the settlement are confidential, so it is hard to be definitive about the reasons for the abrupt ending of the cases. However, comments by the defendants’ representatives highlighted the aggressive and bullying nature of the litigation. It’s notable too, that Signature agreed to contribute toward legal costs –not that common in defamation claims.
Comment
As we have said the reasons the Signature Clinic claims against their former clients were settled will never be known. Because an agreement between the parties was reached out of court, there was no reported judgment, and the terms of settlement are confidential. The expense of proceedings however and the fact that costs (likely to be considerable) were paid to the defendants as part of the settlement show that defamation litigation for online negative reviews is a strategy full of risk. Contact us to find out about alternative ways to deal with negative online comments about your business.
Contact Us
For advice on online defamation and harassment please contact Shubha Nath Solicitor and Director at Nath Solicitors on 44 (0) 203 983 8278 or get in touch with the firm online.
