On 20 March 2025, the Court of Appeal in Warsaw issued a landmark judgment in a case concerning the infringement of a doctor’s personal rights by the ZnanyLekarz.pl portal.
The second-instance ruling upheld the earlier judgment ordering the payment of compensation for the publication of an offensive comment.
The boundary between freedom of expression and the protection of personal rights has for years been one of the most challenging issues in contemporary civil law. In the era of social media, review platforms, and widespread access to the Internet, the conflict between the right to express opinions and the right to protect one’s reputation has become increasingly visible. A perfect example is the high-profile case concerning the ZnanyLekarz.pl portal, in which the Court of Appeal in Warsaw, in its judgment of 20 March 2025, confirmed the liability of the platform’s administrator for the infringement of a doctor’s personal rights through the publication of an offensive user comment.
The case resonated widely not only within the medical community but also in the legal sector, as it touches upon fundamental issues related to the liability of online platforms for content posted by users. At the same time, it demonstrates how thin the line is between permissible criticism and the unlawful violation of good reputation.
The doctor affected by the disputed comment decided to bring an action after an opinion appeared on her profile describing a visit that—according to her—never took place. The post suggested improper conduct by the doctor, which could undermine her professionalism and patients’ trust. Before taking the matter to court, the doctor requested that the portal remove the comment, pointing out its untrue and harmful nature. The administrator refused, arguing that it was not obliged to verify the truthfulness of user-posted opinions and merely acted as an intermediary.
The Regional Court in Warsaw did not accept this argument. In the reasoning of its judgment, the court stated that once a portal receives a notification about the potentially unlawful nature of content, it has an obligation to take action—either to remove the entry or to verify its accuracy. Failure to respond amounts to acceptance of the infringement and leads to civil liability. The court awarded the doctor compensation in the amount of PLN 10,000, finding that her personal rights—particularly her good name and professional reputation—had been violated.
The Court of Appeal in Warsaw fully upheld this ruling. It indicated that the administrator of a portal that enables the publication of opinions about medical professionals cannot evade liability for content posted by users, especially once it has been informed of its potential untruthfulness. The court emphasized that review platforms play an important social role, but at the same time must act with due diligence so as not to allow infringements of the personal rights of individuals concerned by the published content.
This case clearly illustrates that freedom of expression—although fundamental—is not absolute. Every statement, especially in the public sphere, must remain within the limits set by law, and one of the most important limitations is the protection of the personal rights of others. Criticism, even harsh criticism, is permissible provided it is based on facts and does not lead to the dissemination of false information. Otherwise, it becomes an unlawful infringement of the right to a good name.
The legal basis for the protection of personal rights is Article 24 of the Polish Civil Code, which provides for the possibility to demand cessation of infringements, removal of their effects, publication of an appropriate statement, as well as the award of monetary compensation or payment of an appropriate sum for a social purpose. If the infringement of personal rights results in pecuniary damage, the injured party may seek compensation under general principles. In practice, this means that a person whose reputation has been harmed by the publication of false information has a wide range of legal remedies at their disposal.
It is worth emphasizing that liability for the infringement of personal rights may rest not only with the author of the post, but also with the portal administrator if they fail to respond to notifications concerning unlawful content. This is an important signal for all online platforms that provide space for publishing opinions—failure to react to a report of an infringement may lead to civil liability.
Summary
The judgment of the Court of Appeal in Warsaw in the ZnanyLekarz.pl case constitutes an important reference point for judicial practice concerning the protection of personal rights on the Internet. It shows that portal administrators cannot shift all responsibility onto users and must take action when notified of infringements. At the same time, it serves as a reminder that freedom of speech does not entitle anyone to disseminate false information that may harm the reputation of others.
If your good name has been violated, do not remain passive. You may demand the removal of the entry, an apology, and—if necessary—take the matter to court and seek compensation. The protection of personal rights is real and effective, and properly undertaken actions can help restore the disturbed balance and defend your reputation in the public sphere.
We invite you to contact us!
The AJ LAW Team