Facebook Defamation — the Legal Framework
Defamation spread on a social network is assessed under Georgian law exactly like any other: the Civil Code of Georgia has no special norm for Facebook — there are general rules that also work in the digital environment. There are two grounds: Article 993 — a person who intentionally or negligently disseminates or publicises facts harmful to the property of another person is obliged to compensate the damage arising therefrom, if those facts are evidently incorrect; and Article 18 — a person has the right, through the court, to protect his honour, dignity, privacy or business reputation from violation. Facebook is only the environment; the legal substance concerns the fact disseminated and its evident falsity.
Fixing the Evidence — the First Stage of the Case
A digital defamation case begins with evidence: a post, a comment or a share can unilaterally disappear, change or be deleted, and therefore its fixation happens on the very first day — with the account's identity, the date, the content and the scope of dissemination. The second question is the identification of the author: who disseminates the fact and whether his person can be established. The third is the factual nature: Article 993 concerns precisely the dissemination of facts, not the expression of opinion. This difference is the heart of the case: it must be determined whether the statement was an assessment or a concrete assertion verifiable against the truth.
Moreover, the digital environment adds another layer: the scope of dissemination is far broader than a paper publication — a single post reaches thousands of readers within hours, and this circumstance is reflected in the assessment of the damage as well. Therefore at the fixation stage it is necessary to document not only the text itself but also the scale of its dissemination — the account, the group, the number of shares and the context. Every subsequent stage of the case is built on this initial picture.
Cessation and Denial Through the Same Channel — Article 18
Part three of Article 18 contains a rule particularly important for the digital environment: where data violating a person's honour, dignity, business reputation or privacy has been disseminated through mass-information media, its denial must also take place through the same media. A social network is exactly such a medium: where the falsehood spread, there the denial must occur — with the same visibility. Part two of the same article regulates protection through the court, and part four gives the right to publish responsive information. This resolves what a victim of defamation needs most — not only compensation, but the restoration of public truth.
Protection of a Deceased Person — Article 19
Defamation continues to cause damage after death: false information spread about the deceased harms the family and loved ones. Article 19 regulates this case: the rights indicated in Article 18 may also be exercised by a person who, although not himself the bearer of the right to the name or personal dignity, has an interest worthy of protection. At the same time, claiming monetary compensation of moral damage for violation of the name, honour, dignity or business reputation is inadmissible after death — the successor demands protection, not compensation.
Part six of Article 18 regulates compensation: in the case of a culpable violation, the authorised person may also demand compensation for non-pecuniary damage, and compensation of moral damage may be sought independently of the property damage. Time is determined by Article 1008: the limitation period for claiming compensation for tort damage is three years from the moment the injured person learned of the damage or of the person liable. In the digital environment this moment is the point of discovering the post, and establishing it is a documentary question.
The Practical Route and the Lawyer's Role
A Facebook defamation case is built in three stages: fixation (documenting the post, the author and the dissemination), legal assessment (fact or opinion, evident falsity, the public-interest exception — under part two of Article 993 no duty of compensation arises for statements serving the protection of lawful public interests) and presentation of the claim. The platform's internal rules and the host's obligations are regulated by other legislation — they are described here generically; the civil suit is brought against the author. A lawyer builds this chain and represents your interests at every stage.
One more practical note: the internal mechanisms of the social network — a complaint, a demand for a description — do not form part of the legal dispute, but their use leaves an additional trace and sometimes stops the dissemination. A consultation with a lawyer begins exactly by setting the boundary between these two routes: what is the platform's question and what is the court's, and in which sequence to use them.
Frequently Asked Questions
How is Facebook defamation assessed?
Under the general norms: Article 993 links the dissemination of clearly incorrect, damage-causing facts to compensation, and Article 18 to the judicial protection of honour and reputation.
What should be fixed first?
The content of the post or comment, the identity of the author, the date and the scale of dissemination — because digital content is easily deleted or altered.
Can denial occur through the same channel?
Yes — under the third part of Article 18, degrading information disseminated through mass media must be denied through the same means.
Within what period may the claim be brought?
Under Article 1008 — within three years from the moment the injured party learned of the damage or of the obliged person.
How We Help on Legal.ge
A Facebook defamation case demands a single strategy from fixing evidence to the courtroom. On Legal.ge you can consult an experienced advocate who will assess the statement and defend your interests. Submit a request on the site and get qualified assistance.