Defence and action on behalf of individuals, executives, public figures and companies, whether victims of an attack on their reputation or accused over their own statements, in matters of defamation, insult, malicious false accusation, breach of the presumption of innocence and of private life, the right to be forgotten and online content.
The field is not limited to the Press Law of 29 July 1881. It brings together four regimes that do not overlap. The 1881 Law governs defamation and insult: a three-month limitation period running from publication (Article 65), a charging document that must characterise the statements precisely and cite the applicable provision on pain of nullity, and offences that are mutually exclusive (Article 29). The ordinary Criminal Code governs malicious false accusation, invasion of privacy, online harassment, identity theft and deepfakes, with the ordinary limitation period and procedure for misdemeanours. The Civil Code opens urgent interim proceedings (référé) to stop an invasion of privacy or a breach of the presumption of innocence (Articles 9 and 9-1), and a liability action for disparagement of a company’s products or services. Finally, digital law organises the removal of content from hosts and platforms, delisting, and the identification of anonymous authors.
One feature governs these cases: the same content usually falls under several of these regimes at once. An article that attributes a fact to an executive, discloses an aspect of his private life and presents him as guilty before any judgment opens three distinct actions, before different courts, within different time limits, with different evidence. The choice of legal basis, or of a combination, is made in the first few days. It determines what the victim can obtain, the removal of the content, the conviction of its author or compensation, and it is the first thing the other side will attack.
The firm also acts for companies and their executives facing online reviews, campaigns by former employees and coordinated attacks, and for content creators targeted by online pile-ons, fake profiles or deepfakes.
Cases are handled in French and in English.
The first step, a formal notice, a complaint, an application or a summons, commits the case to a legal basis, and each regime has its trap. For the offences under the 1881 Law, the three-month time limit and the formalities of the summons leave no second chance: prosecuting as defamation statements that amount to disparagement, or as insult statements that attribute a fact, leads to inadmissibility, and the Cour de cassation reserves to that Law the remedy for abuses of freedom of expression. For ordinary criminal offences, the time limit is that of ordinary misdemeanours, but the burden of proof is heavier: malicious false accusation requires a final decision establishing that the reported fact was false, and invasion of privacy requires private words or a private place. For civil interim proceedings, urgency and the obviousness of the infringement must be demonstrated with documents in hand. The strategy often consists in combining routes: interim proceedings to stop the harm, criminal or civil action to punish and obtain compensation, the notice and the application for identification to reach the anonymous author.
Three routes coexist. Urgent interim proceedings, to obtain within a few days the removal or correction of content and stop the infringement. Criminal action, by complaint or direct summons before the criminal court, where the civil party drives the proceedings and bears the formalities of the 1881 Law. A civil action on the merits, for compensation. Against anonymous content, the notice to the host and the application for identification come before the action; against search engines, the delisting request based on the right to be forgotten. The choice depends on the statement, its medium, the identity of its author and what the victim is seeking: removal of the content, conviction of the author or compensation.
It depends on the legal basis, not on how serious the statements are. Three months from publication for defamation and insult (Article 65 of the Law of 29 July 1881), one year for discriminatory statements; the ordinary limitation period for misdemeanours for malicious false accusation, invasion of privacy, identity theft or online harassment; five years for a civil action for disparagement. The first task is to date each piece of content and attach its time limit to it.
It depends on the statement. An allegation aimed at the company itself or at its executives amounts to defamation; criticism of its products or services amounts to disparagement, remedied under ordinary liability law. Choosing the wrong legal basis leads to inadmissibility.
Yes, through a judicial requisition in the context of a criminal complaint, or through an ex parte order addressed to the host or the platform. As connection data are retained for a limited period, the request must be made quickly.
Call-back guaranteed within one hour during business hours.
Switchboard: +33 1 55 27 93 93
Emergencies (mobile and WhatsApp): +33 6 42 29 81 44
Email: mehdy@kadri-avocat.com
