What happened?
The issue of lacking legal recourse against often inaccurate Google reviews on the internet is familiar to many business owners, including a pediatrician from Wiener Neustadt. The case prompting the decision involved an unjustified negative review (a mere one-star rating) in which the anonymous user “Peter 2016” accused the doctor of being “miserable as a person.” Although the user initially noted they could not assess the pediatrician’s professional skills and acknowledged that others had rated them highly, they described the doctor’s personal demeanor with one word: “MISERABLE!!”
Against this background, the Higher Regional Court (OLG) of Graz recently issued a landmark decision clarifying that Google is the media owner of reviews and is therefore ultimately responsible for deleting such content.
The review stemmed from the user’s purported frustration at being unable to secure an urgent appointment for their son, who was reportedly in severe pain. In the review, the user alleged that although they were initially promised an appointment within an hour over the phone, they were later denied when it became apparent that it was a first-time visit, allegedly being told, “He’s not one of our patients; the appointment is canceled!!!!”
However, the lower court did not find this account credible. Instead, it determined that the practice’s capacity had already been exhausted at the time in question, and the user had been referred to their primary pediatrician (who, according to „Peter 2016, was already retired) or a hospital. This procedure was standard practice in the doctor‘s office, regardless of whether the patient was new or returning.
Given these circumstances, the pediatrician repeatedly asked Google to delete the review or disclose the identity of the anonymous user. When Google failed to respond, the pediatrician filed a lawsuit with the Regional Court of Wiener Neustadt. The court ruled in her favor, reasoning that the review accused her of conduct incompatible with professional ethics, thereby harming her public reputation. Although the court ordered Google to delete the review, it held that the company, as a host provider, was not a media owner and thus not liable under media law.
How Did the Higher Regional Court Rule?
The OLG upheld the finding that the review constituted defamation, as labeling someone as „miserable as a person” based on a false incident exceeded the bounds of acceptable criticism. However, contrary to the lower court‘s view, the OLG Graz classified Google as a media owner, making the company responsible for the content of reviews.
As a result, Google was required to delete the review and pay the plaintiff EUR 2,000 in damages.
(Decision of the Higher Regional Court of Graz, 17 Bs 119/23h, dated August 23, 2023)
I will be happy to advise and support you in matters of criminal law.
