Review and Defamation Check

Legally classify a review, fake review or damage to your reputation

The check takes your case through the same review route that the courts apply: what does it say, was there customer contact, what has the platform provided, and which route holds up. You can see where your case is heading while you fill it in. This lets you make an initial legal assessment of a review, a fake review or reputational damage yourself.

Start the check

Removal claim Customer contact Platform's duty to review § 21 TDDDG Deadlines

Short profile

What the check helps with

It separates the four questions that are regularly mixed up in practice: the classification of the statement, the customer contact, the depth of evidence provided by the platform and the wish to know the author's identity. Each has its own legal basis and its own prospects of success.

AssessmentThe stage reached, with the provision and decision it relies on

Two draftsNotice under Art. 16 and complaint under Art. 20, generated from your answers

DeadlinesCalculated from the day on which the platform replied

Evidence listTo tick off, with a counter and printable

Situation overview

Where your case is heading

The display changes with every answer. It shows the stage your case is currently at and what is decided at that stage.

No answers yet Answer the first question and the classification begins.

Questionnaire

Five questions along the review route

Step 1 of 5

1. Where is the statement?

The channel determines which procedure is available at all.

Google review or business profileMaps, stars, review, photo or comment on the profile. Review platformkununu, Jameda, Trustpilot, ProvenExpert, HolidayCheck, Booking or similar. Marketplace or app storeAmazon, eBay, Etsy, App Store, Google Play, delivery platform. Social network or comment sectionLinkedIn, Instagram, Facebook, TikTok, X, YouTube, Reddit. Press, blog or websiteArticle, blog post, newsletter, forum, campaign page. Business or internal communicationCustomer letter, circular email, tender, association, partner communication. Unclear or several channelsThe source is unclear or the statement has been spread further.

2. What does the statement say?

Multiple choice. A review usually consists of several layers: star rating, factual statements and value judgements.

A verifiably untrue statement of factA statement that can be refuted with documents or a calculation, for example about prices, wages, deadlines or a transaction. A statement of fact that nobody can proveThe statement sounds like a fact but can be neither proven nor refuted. An insult or disparaging value judgementThe tone goes beyond objective criticism. Personal data or health informationNames of employees, treatment details, internal matters, photos. Only a star rating, without textOne or two stars without any reasons. Several statements within a short timeA series that suggests a common source. Objective but negative criticismThe statement is unpleasant but in substance an opinion. Still unclearThe classification is still to be examined.

3. Was there customer or business contact?

This is the most important question of the entire procedure. Please only answer after you have gone through your records for the period in question.

I have checked and found no matching transactionCustomer file, appointment book, outgoing invoices or personnel file for the period reviewed, without a match. I suspect there was no contact but have not checked yetNobody recognises the name; the records have not been reviewed yet. There was contactThe person was a customer, patient, employee or business partner. I am unable to checkAnonymous review without any clue, or the records for the period no longer exist.

4. What has the platform provided so far?

The platform's answer determines the stage your case is at.

I have not reported anything yetThe matter is still with me. Reported, but no answerThe report has been sent; nothing came back. Only a notice that it has been checkedThe platform writes that it has checked the matter and found the contact confirmed, without any details. A redacted document without reference to a personFor example an employment reference or a receipt that only shows the issuer. Details I could have searched forPeriod, type of service, employment relationship or similar characteristics. Express refusal without detailsThe platform refuses removal and gives no verifiable characteristics.

5. What do you want to achieve?

Multiple choice. The goals have different opponents and different costs.

The review should disappearRemoval by the platform, through the courts if necessary. I want to know who is behind itDisclosure of the author's subscriber data. I want to take action against the authorWarning letter, injunction, damages. It is urgentOngoing tender, financing, sale or public attention. I want to stop the seriesIt is not about one review but about several. I am considering a public replyA reaction in the review thread instead of or alongside the procedure. Still unclearFirst, it should be examined what makes sense.

Assessment

—

This assessment does not replace legal advice. It is based solely on your answers and knows neither the wording of the statement nor your documents nor the other side. The outcome depends on circumstances that a questionnaire cannot capture. Have the case reviewed before you send anything or let a deadline pass.

Your case on the review route

Stage reached—

Supporting route—

Urgency—

Where your case stands

The five stages follow the case law of the BGH's 6th Civil Senate and the higher regional courts that follow it. The stage your case is currently at is highlighted.

What this is based on

What to do now

Where your case could fail

Draft notice

Generated from your answers under Art. 16 of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065. The mandatory details of the provision are included. Complete the square brackets and check the text before you send it.

Report to the platform

What you should have ready

To tick off. The status is kept when printing.

Summary for your enquiry

Summary

What this check is not. It maps the review route against the platform and does not replace an assessment of the individual case. The classification is based solely on your answers, and the underlying case law is inconsistent on one point: Hamburg and Dresden apply different standards to the depth of evidence, without any clarification by the highest court.

Action against the author is a separate procedure with a different opponent and different requirements. The check only covers it insofar as it needs to be distinguished from the removal route.

Have the case reviewed by a lawyer

If you do not want to send the draft yourself or the platform has already refused: we assess the prospects of success, draft the notice and conduct the proceedings against the platform operator.

Get in touch

The legal position in detail

Removing a review: object to customer contact, trigger the duty to review (in German)The full review route with references, model texts and a decision tree. Removing reviewsHow we conduct proceedings against the platform. Media law for businessesThe basics of defending against statements in context. Press lawDistinguishing statements of fact from value judgements.

Frequently asked questions

About the check

Does the check replace a legal review?

No. It places your case on the review route and names the references each stage relies on. The outcome depends on circumstances that a questionnaire cannot capture, such as the exact wording of the statement and the documents of both sides.

Why does the check ask in such detail about customer contact?

Because it is the most effective point of attack. According to the BGH, judgment of 9 August 2022 – VI ZR 1244/20, para. 40, objecting to the lack of contact is enough to trigger the platform's duty to review, and the objection does not even have to be objectively correct. In court, however, the burden of proof lies with you, which is why reviewing your own records before submitting the notice makes sense.

Are my answers stored?

No. The evaluation runs entirely in your browser. No input is transmitted and no results are stored. Whatever you want to keep, copy it using the two buttons.

Where does the draft notice come from?

It is assembled from your answers and follows the mandatory details of Art. 16(2) of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065: a sufficiently substantiated explanation, the exact electronic location, name and contact details, and a statement of good faith. The wording of the objection follows the wording accepted as sufficient by the Federal Court of Justice.

What does the inconsistency between Hamburg and Dresden mean?

Both higher regional courts require the platform to individualise the reviewer but apply different standards as to how far this must go. The Hanseatic Higher Regional Court sets stricter requirements; the Dresden Higher Regional Court requires more cooperation from the reviewed business. Neither senate allowed an appeal on points of law. For advice, this means: the place of jurisdiction is a preliminary question.