The judiciary must act

A pensioner’s “like” made its way to the Supreme Court

The judiciary is called upon to improve the current legal regulations.(Bild: Krone KREATIV/Harald Schneider/APA/picturedesk.com, stock.adobe.com)

A thumbs-up under a comment made its way all the way to the Supreme Court and could end up costing a pensioner from Styria a five-figure euro sum.

The fight against online hate is meaningful and important, but under current legislation, it is producing unintended consequences that surely do not align with the original intent. The Ministry of Justice is called upon to act, but are they even aware of these developments? Especially those concerning “likes” that have been removed?

“Like” on a comment under a post
Here is a recent case from Styria: A married couple posts something on Facebook. A user leaves a comment below it that reads something like this: “I would completely ignore these two people, as I have no use for lies and do not support their need to be the center of attention.” Several dozen “likes” were added to this post. A retiree from Styria also clicked the thumbs-up button—a move that is now costing the woman dearly. More dearly than most court-awarded compensation for pain and suffering in cases of physical injury. That simple “Like” under the comment even made its way to the Supreme Court!

A “like” on a comment is costing the client of attorney Claus Schützenhöfer (above) dearly.(Bild: Zvg, Krone KREATIV)

Injunction and preliminary injunction
But let’s start from the beginning. After the “Like,” the woman received an injunction and a request for a preliminary injunction, which were first handled by the District Court of Fürstenfeld and then by the Regional Court of Graz on appeal. The couple was partially successful there. However, the statement that the plaintiffs had a “need to be the center of attention” was also classified by the Court of Appeals as a permissible value judgment. The plaintiffs filed an appeal with the Supreme Court against this ruling.

Retiree must dig deep into her pockets
The Supreme Court ruled that the appeal was inadmissible due to the failure to raise a legal issue of significant importance. It upheld the lower court’s ruling that this constituted a permissible expression of opinion.

Nevertheless, the scandalous case is costly for the pensioner: The Styrian woman had to bear a portion of the legal costs for the first and second instances as well as her attorney’s fees—the “Like” under the aforementioned comment has already cost her more than 5,000 euros.

Now a private lawsuit as well 
But that’s not all! Most recently, the retiree received a private lawsuit for defamation in connection with the thumbs-up. Each spouse is demanding 2,500 euros in damages, plus 600 euros in detective fees.

The Styrian woman is interested in an out-of-court settlement, for which she will have to dig deep into her pockets. Because if this settlement fails, the client of Hartberg attorney Claus Schützenhöfer faces a criminal trial—and if convicted, a criminal record, a fine, and yet again high court and attorney fees.

This is just one of several “Like” cases currently before the Supreme Court. The judiciary is called upon to improve the current legal regulations.