Disputes about the protection of honor, dignity, business reputation and the recovery of moral damage
L. appealed to the court to O., I., V., B. for the protection of honor, dignity, business reputation and the recovery of compensation for moral damage, arguing that the defendants disseminated information about him that did not correspond to reality, discrediting his honor and dignity, business reputation. The claim was dismissed by the decision of the District Court No. 2 of Almaly district of Almaty dated October 16, 2018. By the decision of the Judicial Board for Civil Cases of the Almaty City Court dated January 31, 2019, the court's decision remained unchanged. The Judicial Board for Civil Cases of the Supreme Court upheld the decision of the appellate instance on the following grounds. It follows from the case file that on February 21, 2018, private bailiffs (hereinafter referred to as bailiffs) O. and B. published posts on their Facebook pages containing information about the criminal prosecution of the Chairman of the Board of the Republican Chamber of Private Bailiffs L., with a copy of the court verdict attached.
Disputes about the protection of honor, dignity, business reputation and the recovery of moral damage
During the same period, bailiffs I. and V. addressed their colleagues in writing with reference to the court verdict. Applying to the court with a claim for the protection of honor, dignity and business reputation, violated by the dissemination of defamatory, untrue information, the plaintiff indicates that the defendants disseminated information that does not correspond to reality, namely, his criminal record. According to paragraph 1 of Article 143 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan (hereinafter referred to as the Civil Code), a citizen has the right to demand in court a refutation of information discrediting his honor, dignity or business reputation. In accordance with paragraph 2 of the regulatory resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated December 18, 1992 No. 6 "On the application in judicial practice of legislation on the protection of honor, dignity and business reputation of individuals and legal entities", when considering civil cases initiated on the grounds and in accordance with the procedure provided for in Articles 141, 143 of the Civil Code, Articles 23 According to Article 150 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the courts need to find out in full whether information has been disseminated that is being sued for refutation., do they discredit the honor and dignity of a citizen, the reputation of an organization, and whether this information is true? From the literal interpretation of this rule, it follows that the basis for protecting honor, dignity and business reputation is a combination of all three of the above conditions, that is, information must be defamatory, it must be disseminated and not correspond to reality.
In the absence of at least one of these circumstances, the claim cannot be satisfied by the court. By virtue of the rules of the current legislation, L. is charged with the obligation to prove the fact of the dissemination of information by the defendants, as well as the fact that this information discredits his honor, dignity and business reputation. The burden of proving the validity of information discrediting honor, dignity or business reputation lies with the person who disseminated them. The fact of dissemination of information at the court session has been established and is not disputed by the parties. Also, according to the conclusions of experts, information about violations of the law by L. in all four episodes is presented in the form of a statement and can be verified, that is, checked for compliance / non-compliance with reality. In case of inconsistency with reality, these information, according to the philological analysis, may be discrediting the honor and dignity of L. At the same time, the fact of the existence of a verdict of the military court of the Aktobe garrison dated January 27, 1997, which L. He was found guilty of committing a crime under paragraph "b" of Article 233 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, and was reliably identified in court. The court also found that the defendants became aware of the existence of a resolution of the supervisory board of the Military Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated May 20, 2004 on the cancellation of the court's verdict for lack of evidence of L.'s guilt in arbitrarily leaving the military unit and terminating the proceedings only when considering this civil case.
Disputes about the protection of honor, dignity, business reputation and the recovery of moral damage
Thus, the court found that the information disseminated by the defendants corresponded to reality, and therefore the courts came to the correct conclusion that the claims were groundless. The evidence collected in the case by the courts of the first and appellate instances was assessed according to their inner conviction, based on an impartial, comprehensive and complete examination of the evidence available in the case in their entirety. The Judicial Board considers these conclusions of the courts to be fair and lawful.
Attention!
Law and Law Law Law draws your attention to the fact that this document is basic and does not always meet the requirements of a particular situation. Our lawyers are ready to assist you in legal advice, drawing up any legal document suitable for your situation.
For more information, please contact a Lawyer / Attorney by phone: +7 (708) 971-78-58; +7 (700) 978 5755, +7 (700) 978 5085.
Attorney at Law Almaty Lawyer Legal Services Legal Advice Civil Criminal Administrative Cases Disputes Protection Arbitration Law Firm Kazakhstan Law Office Court Cases
