A one-star review appears at 11 p.m. It says your Brampton restaurant gave someone food poisoning, or that your garage overcharges and lies, or that you personally defrauded a customer. The person may not exist, and you have no record of ever serving them. By morning a staff member has forwarded it, and a regular customer has asked you about it. Your first impulse is to reply publicly and set the record straight in capital letters.
Please wait before you do that. Online reputation problems are one of the few legal situations where the first response frequently does more harm than the original post. A heated reply can extend the life of a review, expose private customer details, or even create a claim against you. Meanwhile, the legal framework has certain time limits and pitfalls that matter from the first day.
What follows is general information about Ontario defamation law. It is not legal advice, and the right approach depends on the words used, who wrote them, and where they were published.
Save Everything First
Posts vanish. Before you report, reply, or call anyone, preserve the evidence:
- Screenshots showing the full text, the author’s name or handle, the date, the URL, and the platform.
- A note of when and how you first learned of the post, since some deadlines run from that moment.
- Copies of comments, shares, and any replies that show how far it travelled.
- Your records relating to the claim, such as bookings, invoices, or security footage. These might show that the person was never a customer or that the event happened differently.
- Evidence of harm, such as cancelled orders, enquiries that mention the post, or a change in bookings.
Ask a colleague to preserve copies too. If the post is removed tomorrow, you will still have proof it existed.
What Defamation Actually Requires
In broad terms, a person suing for defamation must show that the words would tend to lower their reputation in the eyes of a reasonable person, that the words referred to them, and that they were communicated to at least one other person. Once those points are established, the law presumes falsity and damage, and the burden shifts to the defendant to establish a defence. A permanent written post is generally treated as libel. Spoken statements are usually slander, which has somewhat different rules.
The main defences include:
- Justification (truth). If the sting of the statement is substantially true, the claim fails, however painful it may be.
- Fair comment. Honest opinion on a matter of public interest, based on true facts, is protected even when harsh and unfair-sounding.
- Qualified privilege. Some statements made on an occasion where a person has a duty to speak and the recipient has an interest in hearing, such as a complaint to a regulator, are protected unless they are made maliciously or beyond what the occasion warrants.
- Responsible communication. This protects careful reporting on matters of public interest and is less often relevant to a customer review.
Opinion versus fact is where most review disputes are decided. “Worst service I’ve ever had, the owner was rude and I’d never go back” is probably opinion, and a court will not usually help you. “This business steals deposits and its owner has been charged with fraud” is a factual allegation that is either provable or not. Before spending money on a claim, look at which category your review falls into. A negative but genuine review is unpleasant, and it comes with running any business.
Check the Short Deadlines
This is the point that catches people out. Ontario’s Libel and Slander Act contains special rules for libel “in a newspaper or in a broadcast.” Under section 5(1), no action lies unless the plaintiff has given the defendant written notice within six weeks after the libel came to the plaintiff’s knowledge. Under section 6, the action must also generally be started within three months of that date.
The harder issue is whether a given online publication falls under those rules. In John v. Ballingall, 2017 ONCA 579, the Court of Appeal held that these provisions can apply to the online version of a newspaper article. Other platforms are less settled. Courts have declined to treat certain social media posts as covered, and later appellate commentary indicates that the online nature of a post does not by itself trigger the rules. A typical Google review or personal Facebook rant may well fall outside those provisions, but you do not want to test that after the time has passed.
If the post could possibly be treated as a newspaper or broadcast, including a local online news outlet or a video channel, get advice immediately so that notice can be served within the six weeks. For other claims, the basic two-year period in the Limitations Act, 2002 generally applies, running from when the claim was discovered. Do not treat that as a comfortable cushion, since delay can also undercut a claim that the matter is urgent or very harmful.
Practical Responses, From Lightest to Heaviest
Not every false post needs a lawyer. Think of your options as a ladder.
Report it to the platform. Google, Facebook, Yelp, and similar sites have policies against fake engagement, conflicts of interest, harassment, and off-topic content. Reviews from someone who was never a customer, from a competitor, or as part of a coordinated attack may qualify. Removal is not guaranteed, and these services have their own decision-making. Keep a record of each report.
Respond calmly once. For a business, a brief, professional reply can reassure future customers: “We have no record of this visit. Please contact us at this number so we can look into it.” Do not disclose a real customer’s personal information, medical details, or account history. Avoid accusing the reviewer of lying unless you can prove it. Our page on privacy touches on how businesses handle personal information.
Contact the author directly, if known. Some people will remove a post when asked politely, especially where they misunderstood the facts or have since cooled down.
Send a lawyer’s letter. A letter can identify the false statement, explain why it is defamatory, and request removal, a retraction, and a commitment not to repeat it. It is usually most effective when the author is identifiable and has something to lose. It can also backfire. A heavy-handed letter can be posted online and draw far more attention than the original review.
Go to court. A claim can be appropriate where the allegation is serious, clearly false, and causing real harm.
Anonymous Posters
Many false reviews come from throwaway accounts. Ontario courts can in some circumstances order a third party, such as a platform or internet provider, to hand over identifying information, using what is commonly called a Norwich order. The party asking must generally show a legitimate, supportable claim and that the order is needed and appropriate, and privacy interests are weighed. The process costs money and may lead only to an email address or an IP address that needs further steps.
Before going down this road, look for clues you already hold. The wording, the timing, and details of the review often point to a former employee, a competitor, or a customer with a specific grievance. Treat your suspicion as a theory, however. Publicly accusing the wrong person is its own form of defamation.
The Anti-SLAPP Risk
Section 137.1 of the Courts of Justice Act allows a defendant to ask a judge to dismiss a proceeding that arises from an expression relating to a matter of public interest. Once that threshold is met, the plaintiff must show grounds to believe that the claim has substantial merit, that the defendant has no valid defence, and that the harm suffered is serious enough to outweigh the public interest in protecting the expression. The Supreme Court of Canada explained the framework in 1704604 Ontario Ltd. v. Pointes Protection Association, 2020 SCC 22.
Two consequences stand out. Once such a motion is made, the lawsuit is generally frozen until the motion is finally dealt with. And if the case is dismissed, the moving party is presumptively entitled to costs on a full indemnity basis, which can be a large sum. Not all reviews are matters of public interest, and courts look at this with care, but consumer warnings can raise the issue. Before suing a customer or a community member, get a clear-eyed assessment of this risk and of the actual harm you can prove. A small business with no measurable losses may not be well placed to win such a motion.
Which Court, and What You Can Win
Ontario’s Small Claims Court can hear claims for money up to $50,000, and defamation claims have been allowed to proceed there, but it cannot order removal of a post. A damages award may not get the content taken down by itself, although a judgment can be useful evidence when you make a further request to a platform. For an injunction, including a permanent order to stop publishing, you will need the Superior Court of Justice, in Peel at 7755 Hurontario St. in Brampton. Courts are cautious about ordering a defendant to stop speaking before trial, and the bar for an interim injunction is high in defamation cases.
Persistent campaigns can raise other issues. In Caplan v. Atas, 2021 ONSC 670, the Superior Court recognized a tort of internet harassment on extreme facts involving a long and repeated campaign of online abuse. That decision is not a remedy for one rude comment, but it shows that courts can respond when ordinary defamation remedies fail. If threats or stalking are involved, report them to Peel Regional Police, and keep a detailed log.
If You Are the One Being Accused
Sometimes the letter arrives at your door. You posted a review of a local contractor, and now a lawyer is threatening to sue. Do not ignore it, and do not fire back in anger or immediately delete everything, which could look like hiding evidence. Keep copies of what you posted and what supports it. Then get advice on whether a correction or removal makes sense, and on whether your statement is defensible as true or as honest opinion. Early action can often contain the risk.
A Measured Plan
A proportionate plan weighs the seriousness of the allegation, how far the post has spread, the identity of the writer, what you can prove, and the likely cost. Many issues resolve at the platform-report or lawyer’s-letter stage. A smaller number deserve a claim.
If a post is damaging you or your business, take your saved evidence to a lawyer with a timeline of when you found it. Our civil litigation team can review it and explain the options, and you can contact us promptly if a publication may fall under the six-week rule.