Removing Defamatory Google Reviews

Some Google reviews go beyond criticism and make false factual claims that damage a business or the people behind it. We help Australian businesses assess whether a review may be defamatory and prepare a legal removal request to Google, without the cost of court proceedings.

Updated 2026-10-11

When is a Google review defamatory?

In broad terms, a review may be defamatory if it is published to others, identifies a person, and conveys a meaning that would lower that person's reputation in the eyes of ordinary members of the community. Defamation law in Australia is made by each state and territory, through Defamation Acts based on the Model Defamation Provisions, and the details can differ between jurisdictions.

The key distinction for reviews is between opinion and fact. "The worst haircut I've had" is opinion. "The owner stole money from my account" is a factual allegation; if it is false, it may be defamatory. Defences exist, including truth (justification) and honest opinion, so a review that is harsh but true, or that is clearly an honestly held opinion based on stated facts, is unlikely to be actionable. Our guide on what makes a Google review defamatory goes through the elements and defences in more detail.

The corporate standing problem

This is the point many business owners do not expect. Under Australia's uniform defamation laws, most corporations cannot sue for defamation at all. The exception is an "excluded corporation", which is broadly a not-for-profit organisation, or a company with fewer than 10 employees that is not related to another corporation (and is not a public body). Larger companies generally have no defamation claim of their own, however damaging the review.

Two consequences follow. First, a review attacking a company may still defame an individual who is identifiable from it, such as the owner, a named practitioner or a staff member, and that person may have standing even when the company does not. Second, even where a company lacks standing, a review that is false and damaging may still breach Google's own policies or other laws, so it may be challengeable on a different basis. Our page on business defamation explains standing in more detail.

Reforms that took effect from 1 July 2021 in several jurisdictions, with others following later, also introduced a "serious harm" element. For an excluded corporation, serious harm is tied to serious financial loss. These reforms did not commence everywhere on the same date, which is one reason jurisdiction matters. See our overview of online defamation for the background.

Google's legal removal route is not a court case

Google operates a process for reporting content for legal reasons, separate from its ordinary policy reporting. Through it, you can ask Google to remove a review on the basis that it is unlawful under local law, including on defamation grounds. Google assesses the request and decides whether to act.

It is important to be clear about what this route is and is not:

• It is not litigation. No court proceedings are filed, no court order is made, and the reviewer is not sued.
• It does not need a court order to start. A request can be made on the basis of the content and the supporting explanation.
• It is Google's decision. Google reviews the request and may decline it. A request does not oblige Google to remove anything.
• It is often quicker and far cheaper than court. That is why it is usually the sensible first step for businesses that do not want to pursue the reviewer personally.

Our page on Google review legal removal sets out how the route works. Court action, including seeking orders against an anonymous reviewer or against a platform, remains a separate option, and one for an Australian lawyer.

How we prepare a legal removal request

1. Identify the statements. We isolate the specific words that convey a factual allegation, as opposed to opinion.
2. Identify who is defamed. Whether the claim concerns the business, an identifiable individual, or both, which affects how the request is framed.
3. Show why it is false. We work with you to gather what demonstrates the allegation is untrue, such as records, correspondence, or the absence of any customer relationship.
4. Address the harm. We set out the effect the claim has, or is likely to have, on reputation.
5. Consider other grounds. Many defamatory reviews also breach Google's policies, for example as fake, conflict-of-interest or harassing content. Where that is the stronger route, we use it instead or as well.

If Google declines a request, we review whether a further step is realistic. Our Google review disputes service covers that stage.

Defamation, policy breach, or both?

In practice, the reviews we see that make false factual allegations rarely sit in a single category. A review accusing a clinic of fraud may come from someone who was never a patient, which is a fake-review problem. A review naming a staff member and alleging misconduct may also be harassment, or may disclose personal information. When that happens, the policy route can be simpler: Google does not have to weigh up defences such as truth or honest opinion if the review plainly breaches its content rules.

The legal route is most useful where the review looks like a genuine customer experience on its face but contains a specific, false and damaging claim, such as an allegation of a crime, of dishonest billing or of professional misconduct that did not occur. For example, imagine a hypothetical accounting practice whose review states that the principal "was struck off for stealing client funds". If the principal has never been the subject of any disciplinary action, that statement is checkable, and the falsity can be shown. A review that merely says the practice was "expensive and unhelpful" is opinion, and would not be framed as defamation at all.

Choosing the stronger route first matters, because a request that is declined can make the next step harder. We set out our reasoning in the assessment so you understand why a particular channel has been chosen.

Timing considerations

If court action is a possibility, time limits matter. Under the uniform defamation laws the limitation period for defamation is generally one year from publication, with limited extensions. The Stage 1 reforms also introduced a requirement to give a concerns notice before starting proceedings in jurisdictions where they apply. A Google legal removal request does not pause any limitation period. If you are weighing up court action, get legal advice early.

Pricing

Our fees are the same whether a review is removed through Google's policy process or its legal removal route. You pay only for reviews that are removed, with no upfront removal fee:

• 1 review: AU$469 per removed review
• 2–4 reviews: AU$455 per removed review
• 5–9 reviews: AU$439 per removed review
• From 10 reviews: AU$425 per removed review

Australian dollars, plus GST where applicable. No removal, no fee.

Prices are in Australian dollars, plus GST where applicable. See Google review removal cost for how this compares with engaging a law firm.

Sources

• Google Legal Help: Report Content for Legal Reasons
• Google Maps User Generated Content Policy: Prohibited & restricted content
• Google Business Profile Help: Report inappropriate reviews

Ask us to look at the review

If a Google review makes claims about your business or your people that you believe are false, send it to us using the free assessment form below. We will reply within 24 hours with our view on whether a legal removal request, a policy complaint or neither is the right route.