Requiring removal of an article from a website is an appropriate remedy for violation of an individual's personal non-property right - Civil Cassation Court of the Supreme Court

The interpretation of part 2, Article 278 of the Civil Code of Ukraine indicates that the legislator allows the use of various remedies for the protection of a personal non-property right. In the case of dissemination of information on the Internet that infringes a person's personal non-property right, a request to remove the item from the Internet is an appropriate remedy.

This conclusion was reached by the Civil Cassation Court of the Supreme Court.

In the present case, the plaintiff sought to have the information published on the Internet declared untrue, defamatory and injurious to his honour, dignity and business reputation, and to have the defendants ordered to remove the relevant articles from the websites.

The court of first instance dismissed the claim. The court of appeal changed the reasoning of this judgment, stating that the method chosen by the plaintiff to protect the violated right was not provided for by law.

In overturning the judgments in this part, the Civil Cassation Court of the Supreme Court stated that the choice of the method of protection of personal non-property rights, in particular the right to respect for dignity and honour, the right to the inviolability of business reputation, lies with the plaintiff.

A person whose right has been violated may choose both general and special remedies to protect his or her right, as determined by the law governing specific civil legal relations. In this regard, the courts should take into account that, in accordance with Article 275 of the Civil Code of Ukraine, the protection of a personal non-property right is carried out in the manner prescribed by Chapter 3 of this Code, as well as in other ways in accordance with the content of this right, the manner of its dissemination and the consequences caused by its violation.

Pursuant to part 4, Article 32 of the Constitution of Ukraine, everyone is guaranteed judicial protection of the right to refute false information about themselves and their family members and the right to demand the withdrawal of any information, as well as the right to compensation for material and moral damage caused by the collection, storage, use and dissemination of such false information.

In overturning the judgment of the court of first instance in this part, the court of appeal concluded that the method chosen by the plaintiff to protect the infringed right was not provided for by law. At the same time, the court of appeal did not review the decision of the court of first instance with regard to the relevant claims.

As a result, the Civil Cassation Court of the Supreme Court overturned the contested judgments in this part and referred the case back to the court of first instance for a new trial.

The Resolution of the Supreme Court of 11 October 2023 in case No. 756/10624/21 (proceedings No. 61-1711св23) - https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/114187195.

This and other legal positions of the Supreme Court can be found in the Database of Legal Positions of the Supreme Court - lpd.court.gov.ua.