Defamatory Google review: your legal options in France and the EU
When Google’s rules are not enough, the law takes over. Defamation, insult, disparagement, the French LCEN, the EU DSA: what each notion covers, who to address, and what an effective formal notice looks like.
Google moderates reviews under its own rules, and those rules do not cover everything. A review can be false, specific and devastating without falling into any report category. At that point the question is no longer “does this break Google’s rules?” but “is this legal?”.
This article explains the useful notions without unnecessary jargon. It does not replace a lawyer: it lets you know when to consult one, and with what file.
Three qualifications, three situations
Defamation
The allegation of a specific fact that damages the honour or reputation of a person, natural or legal. “This garage charged me for parts it never replaced” is an allegation of fact. If it is false, it is defamation.
In France, defamation is governed by the Press Freedom Act of 29 July 1881. It is a criminal matter, with a very short limitation period: three months from publication. After that, the action is closed.
Insult
An outrageous expression that imputes no specific fact. “Crooks”, “thieves”, “incompetent” with nothing more: insults. Same law, same three-month limit.
Disparagement
Criticism of a company’s products or services, by a competitor or with intent to harm, in an excessive or false way. It falls under civil liability (article 1240 of the French Civil Code) and unfair competition. The limitation period is five years, and the procedure is civil, hence more flexible.
In practice, a false review aimed at your business can often be qualified both as defamation and as disparagement. The choice of qualification affects procedure and deadlines: that is a lawyer’s decision.
What is not actionable
A sincere review, however harsh, however clumsy, is an opinion protected by freedom of expression. “Slow service, cold food, I won’t be back” is neither defamation nor disparagement, whatever you think of the judgement’s accuracy. French courts and the European Court of Human Rights give broad protection to consumer criticism.
The legal ground opens when the review asserts specific, false facts, or when it is posted by a competitor or with a manifest intent to harm.
Who to address
Google, as a hosting provider
In France, the Law for Confidence in the Digital Economy (LCEN) organises hosting providers’ liability: they are not responsible for published content as long as they are unaware of it, but they must act promptly once notified of manifestly illegal content.
Since 2024, the EU Digital Services Act (DSA) additionally requires platforms to provide an accessible notification mechanism, diligent handling, and a reasoned response.
Google has a dedicated form for legal removal requests, separate from the standard report. The notification must be precise: identification of the content, URL, legal qualification, grounds, and the notifier’s identity. A vague notification does not bind the host.
The author
When the author is identifiable, a direct formal notice often produces removal within days. Many authors of false reviews have not measured the risk.
The courts
If refused, summary proceedings can obtain prompt removal, and proceedings on the merits can obtain compensation. Identifying an anonymous author goes through a request to the host, a regulated but workable procedure.
What an effective formal notice looks like
A formal notice does not need to be long. It needs to be precise:
- Exact identification of the content: profile URL, displayed author, date, full text quoted.
- The facts: what the review claims, and why it is false, with supporting documents.
- The legal qualification and the applicable provisions.
- The demand: removal within a set period, usually 8 to 15 days.
- The warning about what follows in case of refusal.
Sent by registered mail or through a channel that proves receipt, it also becomes the opening exhibit of any later action.
The calendar to respect
The most often neglected point: the three-month limit for defamation and insult. If you discover a defamatory review, building the file must start immediately. A dated screenshot, a bailiff’s report if the stakes justify it, and contact with counsel without waiting for Google’s answer.
Our approach
We always start with Google’s rules, because it is faster and cheaper when it works. When it does not, or when the review is plainly defamatory, we move to the legal ground with our partner lawyers. Send us the review: we will tell you the most effective route before you commit to anything.