“Defamation of a business Ireland” is a search that covers two different plaintiffs, and since 1 March 2026 the law treats them differently. The Defamation Act 2009 as amended by the Defamation (Amendment) Act 2026 now requires a company to show serious harm before a statement about it is defamatory at all; a sole trader does not have to. This page sets out the section 12 test and the evidence it calls for, the line between defamation and injurious falsehood, the review cases that make up most business claims, and the Circuit Court order that declares a statement false. It starts, as every claim does, with the exact words, where they were published, and who the business actually is in law.
Defamation of a Business Ireland: One Tort, Two Kinds of Plaintiff
Section 6 defines one tort of defamation: a statement that tends to injure a person’s reputation in the eyes of reasonable members of society, published to at least one person other than the plaintiff, that identifies the plaintiff. A statement includes words, pictures, visual images, gestures and sounds, in any medium including electronic, so a post, a review, a flyer or a remark to a supplier all qualify. The tort is actionable without proof of financial loss, and under section 11 there is one cause of action for all publications of the same statement, so time runs from the first publication. What the Act now asks of a business before any of that is: who, in law, is the plaintiff? A limited company is a body corporate and a separate legal person. A sole trader is an individual. Company defamation and defamation of a sole trader are decided under the same section 6, but since March 2026 one of them has a further hurdle.
The Serious Harm Test for Companies (Section 12)
Section 12, inserted by the 2026 Act, provides that a statement about a body corporate is not defamatory unless it has caused or is likely to cause serious harm to its reputation, and for a body trading for profit that means serious financial loss. There is no serious harm test for individuals. The test is part of the definition, not a defence, so it is the company’s to prove and it is the first thing the other side will say has not been shown. “Likely to cause” means a company does not have to wait for the loss to arrive, but it does have to point to why loss is probable: the market the statement reached, the customers who read it, the contract under negotiation when it appeared. A company letter that asserts damage without saying what was lost has not yet made out a claim. The test is explained in full in our guide to the serious harm test for companies.
Sole Trader or Company: Why It Decides the Claim
A sole trader sues as a person. A plumber, consultant, hairdresser or farmer trading under a business name need not prove any loss at all, because section 12 applies only to a body corporate. Where a reasonable reader would understand the statement as reflecting on the owner personally, which is usually the case for a one-person business, the owner has a claim under section 6 without the section 12 hurdle. The same point helps a company: where the words name a director or owner alongside the company, the individual may sue personally and does not have to show financial loss. The first consultation decides who the plaintiff should be.
Evidence of Financial Loss
For a company the claim stands or falls on evidence, gathered early and dated. What serious financial loss looks like in a file:
- Lost contracts or tenders: the quote accepted and then withdrawn, with the correspondence showing when and why.
- Cancelled bookings or orders: the cancellations clustered after the date of publication.
- A decline in enquiries: web analytics, call logs or enquiry records showing the fall from that date.
- A customer’s stated reason: the email or message in which a customer says they read the statement and decided not to proceed.
Loss that cannot be documented is loss a court is unlikely to find. The records are also what the solicitor’s letter relies on.
Trade Libel and Injurious Falsehood: A Separate Tort
Searches for trade libel usually land on the second tort that protects a business, and the two should not be confused. Injurious falsehood, also called malicious falsehood, is a false statement about a person’s goods or business, published maliciously, causing actual financial loss. Unlike defamation it does not require injury to reputation, and loss must be proved. A claim that a product is unsafe, or that a business has closed, may injure trade without injuring reputation, which is injurious falsehood ground. Defamation remains the claim where the statement attacks the honesty, competence or conduct of the business. Which tort is run, or whether both are, is decided on the words and the evidence.
Reviews, Posts and Forums
Most business claims now begin with an online review or post. The first question is whether the words are honest opinion, protected by section 20 where the opinion was honestly held and based on facts that were true or indicated, or an allegation of fact, which under section 16 the author must prove true. The second is whether the author can be identified. Report to the platform first: the Digital Services Act requires platforms to run notice-and-action systems, though a platform report does not pause the one-year clock in section 38. Where the author is anonymous, section 45 lets the Circuit Court order the platform to disclose identifying information. The review route in full is on our page on fake and defamatory online reviews and in a fake Google review is damaging my business.
The Section 28 Order and the Other Remedies
Where a letter does not end it, the Circuit Court, whose jurisdiction in defamation is €75,000, can make a declaratory order under section 28 that the statement was false and defamatory, on a summary application and without damages. For a business whose aim is a public finding that the review or post was false, and a document to put in front of the platform and the search engine, the section 28 order is often the whole strategy. A correction order under section 30 and a prohibition order under section 33 are also available, and damages under section 31 are assessed on the matters listed there, including the nature and gravity of the allegation, the means and extent of publication and any apology. The High Court, sitting without a jury for actions commenced on or after 1 March 2026, has unlimited jurisdiction. Before anything issues, section 34K requires your solicitor to inform you of the specified ADR options and file a statutory declaration with the originating document. Proceedings carry a risk of being ordered to pay the other side’s costs if the claim fails; most Circuit Court defamation claims settle before hearing. The sequence is in how to sue for defamation in Ireland.
Disputes Inside the Business, and the Other Side
Statements made in a dispute between shareholders or directors often arrive with a company law problem attached, and the two are dealt with separately. Our colleagues at companysolicitor.ie handle shareholder and director disputes; this site deals with the words. A business that has received a defamation letter about its own review or post gets the same analysis from the other side, beginning with whether the complainant is a company that must show serious harm. We never act for both sides of the same dispute.
What a Business Defamation Solicitor Establishes First
Whether the plaintiff is the company, the owner or both; whether the words are fact or opinion; whether serious financial loss can be shown from the records, or whether injurious falsehood is the better fit; whether the author is known or needs a section 45 order; whether a platform notice, a letter or a section 28 application is the first step; the costs risk; and the date by which proceedings must issue. Bring the statement captured with the URL and date visible, the author and the records of lost business. The initial consultation is a fixed fee, payable in advance, set out on our fees page, and the Defamation Claim Checker runs the elements before you call.
A Statement That Is Costing Your Business?
Bring the words, the author and your records. One consultation establishes who the plaintiff should be, whether serious harm can be shown, and the route to removal and a finding that it was false.
Call 01 5827148