I posted an honest bad review and the business threatens to sue me. What are my defences?

You had a bad meal, a botched renovation or poor service, and wrote about it. Now the business has sent a lawyer's letter saying your review is defamatory and demanding an apology and damages. This guide explains the defences a reviewer can rely on, and the risks to watch for.

Is a negative review defamatory?

A statement can be defamatory if it tends to lower a person or business in the estimation of right-thinking members of society. A business can complain about a review that harms its trading reputation. But "negative" is not the same as "unlawful". The question is what the words mean to an ordinary reader, and whether a defence applies.

Defence 1: justification (truth)

If what you said is substantially true, justification is a full defence. Where words contain two or more distinct charges, the defence does not fail only because the truth of every charge is not proved, if the unproved parts do not materially injure the claimant's reputation in light of the parts that are proved (Defamation Act 1957, s.8).

So, evidence matters. Receipts, photos, chat messages, booking records and the names of others who were present can all help show what happened.

Have a question about your own situation? Ask on WhatsApp

Defence 2: fair comment (honest opinion)

Many reviews are mostly opinion: "the worst service I've had", "overpriced for what you get". Fair comment protects an honest opinion on a matter of public interest, such as the quality of goods or services offered to the public, based on true facts. Where words are partly fact and partly opinion, the defence does not fail just because every fact is not proved, if the opinion is fair comment on the facts that are proved (s.9).

The comment should be recognisable as opinion, not a hidden factual allegation. Saying "the food was cold and I would not return" is different from saying "they reuse leftovers from other customers" without proof.

Where reviewers get into trouble

• Stating unprovable facts: allegations of fraud, hygiene breaches or criminal conduct.
• Exaggeration beyond what happened.
• Naming or attacking individual staff in personal terms.
• Repeating the review across many platforms after a complaint.
• Posting with malice, for example to settle a personal score, which can defeat fair comment.

What should I do first?

1. Do not delete everything in a panic. Screenshot your review and the dates first.
2. Collect evidence: receipts, photos, messages and witness names.
3. Read the letter carefully: what words are complained of, and what is demanded.
4. Consider editing clear factual overstatements, while keeping a record of the original.
5. Reply in writing within the time given, or get advice before you do.

Example

A customer writes that a renovation contractor "abandoned the job halfway and ignored my calls for three weeks". The contractor threatens to sue. The customer has the contract, the payment records, the dated chat logs showing no reply, and photos of the unfinished work. Those records support justification, and the customer's statement that the contractor was "unreliable" is likely to be treated as comment on proved facts.

Common mistakes

• Replying to the letter with a new, more aggressive post.
• Assuming opinion is always safe, even when it implies facts you cannot prove.
• Admitting liability in a hurried apology without understanding its effect.
• Ignoring the letter. The business may then file a claim.

When to speak to a lawyer

Speak to a lawyer when you receive a letter of demand or court papers about a review, or before you post or reply further. See our defamation page; you can also contact us.

Frequently asked questions

Can a business sue me for a one-star rating with no words?

It is the meaning conveyed that matters. A bare rating usually conveys opinion, but the circumstances and any accompanying text count.

Should I take my review down?

Taking it down or editing it may reduce ongoing harm and help in settlement talks, but keep a copy. Get advice on wording before agreeing to an apology.

How long does the business have to sue?

Defamation claims are generally subject to the six-year limit for actions founded on tort (Limitation Act 1953, s.6(1)(a)), but delay can weaken urgent relief.

Sources & fact check

Legal points in this article were checked against the primary sources below. The law can change; this is general information, not legal advice.

1. Defamation Act 1957 (Act 286), AGC Laws of Malaysia
2. Limitation Act 1953 (Act 254), including section 6, AGC Laws of Malaysia
3. Office of the Chief Registrar, Federal Court of Malaysia (Judiciary portal)

Fact-checked on 17 Oct 2026