Adjudicative Refutation of Dubious Information Spread in Social Media
The following article is a comprehensive rebuttal of dubious information spread throughout the social media, based on scientific materials in judicial practice. It includes the development of theoretical principles as well as practical application of the law in protection of human dignity in civil legal proceedings.
The author provides an analysis of standard information, scientific literature and judicial practice as to the steps in the rebuttal in civil legal procedures of dubious information spread throughout social media and provides resolutions and proposals regarding the legal applications in protection of the honour and dignity of persons who intend to dispute such information. The article deals with the judicial components of the offence i.e. spreading of information to at least one person by any means; spreading information which refers to an individual or a legal entity i.e. a plaintiff; spreading dubious information i.e. that is information that does not correspond to the facts; spreading information that violates persona l non-property rights i.e. causes harm to personal welfare or prevents a person from realizing his personal non-property rights completely and timely. The author elaborates on each of these elements to the degree that their sum satisfies the demands of the claim. The form of protection of personal non-property rights, particularly those of dignity and honour, the right to the inviolability of a business reputation, is the choice of the plaintiff. In addition, the plaintiff may choose a general as well as a specific form of protection of his rights set out by the law that regulates specific legal relations. The author considers separately the problem of selecting a respondent (co-respondent) in specific cases (difficult in the selection of an appropriate respondent), where a most defenceless situation is created: without the establishment of appropriate respondents it is impossible both to contest the authenticity of the information which violates the honour and dignity of the individual and to provide compensation for the moral harm.
Tsirat, K. (2018, September 26). Zakhyst chesti, hidnosti ta dilovoi reputatsii. Yurydychna hazeta, 39 (641). Retrieved from: http://bit.ly/39PryRj.
Konventsiia pro zakhyst prav liudyny y osnovopolozhnykh svobod ta praktyky yii zastosuvannia Yevropeiskym sudom vid 04.11.1950. (n.d.). Retrieved from Verkhovna Rada Ukrainy. Zakonodavstvo Ukrainy: http://bit.ly/2V1LT1v.
Pro sudovu praktyku u spravakh pro zakhyst hidnosti ta chesti fizychnoi osoby, a takozh dilovoi reputatsii fizychnoi ta yurydychnoi osoby : postanova Plenumu Verkhovnoho Sudu Ukrainy vid 27.02.2009 № 1. (n.d.). Retrieved from Verkhovna Rada Ukrainy. Zakonodavstvo Ukrainy: http://bit.ly/3aSQGH4.
Rishennia Yevropeiskoho sudu z prav liudyny vid 08.07.1986 u spravi Linhensa (№ 12/1984/84/131). (n.d.). Retrieved from Verkhovna Rada Ukrainy. Zakonodavstvo Ukrainy: http://bit.ly/33iAbBr.
Rishennia Shevchenkivskoho raionnoho sudu m. Kyieva vid 05.12.2018 u spravi № 761/8839/18. (n.d.). Retrieved from Yedynyi derzhavnyi reiestr sudovykh rishen Ukrainy: http://bit.ly/2U42rUd.
Rishennia Zinkivskoho raionnoho sudu Poltavskoi oblasti vid 30.09.2019 u spravi № 530/8/19. (n.d.). Retrieved from Yedynyi derzhavnyi reiestr sudovykh rishen Ukrainy: http://bit.ly/2TNtN2a.
Rishennia Zolochivskoho raionnoho sudu Lvivskoi oblasti vid 03.10.2017 u spravi № 445/339/17. (n.d.). Retrieved from Yedynyi derzhavnyi reiestr sudovykh rishen Ukrainy: http://bit.ly/2U6PgSp.
Rishennia Apeliatsiinoho sudu m. Kyieva vid 11.08.2016 r. u spravi № 761/13156/16-ts. (n.d.). Retrieved from Yedynyi derzhavnyi reiestr sudovykh rishen Ukrainy: http://bit.ly/2wYY8S9.