Deleted, but flagged: Munich court allows notice of removed reviews
Your contact person
Having a fake review removed does not mean you get your profile back. Many platforms now record the deletion visibly, often using the word “defamation”.
Following the Higher Regional Court of Cologne, the Higher Regional Court of Munich has now also ruled that such a notice may stay. For those affected, the question shifts to how best to deal with unlawful reviews.
In an order of 21 September 2026 (case no. 18 W 839/26), the Higher Regional Court of Munich (Oberlandesgericht München) rejected an application for an injunction brought by a law firm against the operator of a review platform. The platform had noted in the firm’s profile that several reviews had been removed for “defamation”. They had been deleted because their authors had apparently never been clients of the firm. Of all things, the firm’s success against the false reviews thus reappeared as a blemish on its profile.
Overview
Why the court sided with the platform
Like the Higher Regional Court of Cologne before it, the Munich court examined the case essentially under the GDPR. The information about deleted reviews is data relating to the firm and its professional activity. The platform may process it if it has a legitimate interest and the interests of the person concerned do not prevail (Art. 6(1)(f) GDPR).
The court found such an interest in transparency about deletions and about possible distortions of the overall rating. According to the order, the platform’s concern is to be recognised as a legitimate interest, and the notice also serves a legitimate interest of the platform’s users. On the other side, only the firm’s professional sphere was affected, and the notice was worded neutrally.
Nor was the court troubled by the word “defamation”. The notice was based on true facts, the term corresponded to general usage, and the linked explanations made sufficiently clear what was meant. That readers are more likely to think of slander than of an author who simply was never a customer was something the court considered acceptable.
The Digital Services Act does not help here
What is new compared with the Cologne decisions is the look at the EU Digital Services Act (DSA). The firm had also relied on the European platform rules. The Munich court rejected any claim on that basis: the DSA does not give profile holders a right to have a notice removed that the platform has written itself. That makes sense, as the obligations under the DSA essentially concern the handling of user content, not the operator’s own statements.
Three higher regional courts, one line
There are now three appellate decisions, all pointing in the same direction. On 12 June 2026 (case no. 15 W 55/26), the Higher Regional Court of Cologne (Oberlandesgericht Köln) denied a doctor a claim against a comparable notice, likewise on the basis of the GDPR. We reported on that case in detail (in German) and explained why we consider the reasoning too narrow.
The competition law senate of the same court took the same view on 14 July 2026 (case no. 6 W 50/26), this time under unfair competition law. A holiday resort had objected to the note “21 to 50 reviews removed due to complaints of defamation” in its Google profile. With no fewer than 5,528 reviews, the average consumer would not understand the notice as an accusation that the business deliberately fights legitimate criticism, the senate held. It rejected both disparagement under Section 4 of the German Act against Unfair Competition (UWG) and interference with the established business.
One may regret this, and we do. A doctor, lawyer or hotelier who sees the word “defamation” next to their name does not perceive it as a neutral statistic. In practice, however, businesses will have to adjust to this case law.
What those affected should now bear in mind
After three consistent decisions, action against the notice itself currently has little prospect of success. That does not mean there are no starting points left. Anyone who keeps an eye on these notices can do quite a lot:
- Check the figures: the courts each stressed that the notice was based on true facts. If the number or range shown is wrong, the position is different. Anyone filing complaints should therefore document them carefully. In the Cologne holiday resort case, the challenge also failed because the applicant disputed the figure only in general terms.
- Watch the presentation: neutral, not highlighted, relating only to professional activity. These were the reasons why the courts approved the notice. If it is placed more prominently or worded judgementally, the balancing exercise must be carried out afresh.
- Bundle and plan deletions: in the cases so far, the notice related to a twelve-month period. It may make sense to challenge unlawful reviews together rather than one by one throughout the year.
- Maintain your profile actively: a note about five deleted entries reads differently with 20 reviews than with 500. Asking satisfied customers for a review dilutes the effect in an entirely legitimate way.
The basic principle remains unchanged: nobody has to put up with unlawful reviews, not even for fear of the notice. A false one-star review from someone who was never a customer usually does more harm than the notice that it was removed.
Frequently asked questions about notices of deleted reviews
May a review platform show that reviews have been deleted?+
Is the word “defamation” not misleading if the author simply was never a customer?+
Does the Digital Services Act help against the notice?+
Should one therefore refrain from having false reviews deleted?+
False reviews in your profile, or a deletion notice that is not accurate?
We review which reviews can be challenged, how best to proceed and whether the platform’s statements are correct. You will usually receive an initial assessment within 24 hours.
Further information
- Deleted fake reviews: why the “defamation” notice itself becomes a reputational problem (in German)
- Warning notices on Jameda and Trustpilot: lawful or damaging to reputation? (in German)
- Google must prove business contact to the person reviewed (in German)
- Our fields of activity
- Our successes
Related posts
Multiple awards.
