Vague Facebook Comment Still Ruled as Defamation by Court

According to case records, in February 2025, Ms. X discovered a Facebook post showing a photo of her 70-year-old father posing with Ms. H inside the room where her late mother’s altar was located. Upset by the post, Ms. X commented:
"A shameless woman sneaking into someone’s house and into a room deserves to be cursed. If it’s outside, I wouldn’t care. If you can play, you can bear the consequences."

The comment quickly drew attention and caused serious conflict between the two women. Local authorities attempted to mediate multiple times but failed.

Ms. H argued that the comment was directed at her and had severely damaged her honor and dignity. She filed a lawsuit demanding that Ms. X publicly apologize on social media and pay VND 23 million (about USD 900) in moral damages.

Ms. X, however, claimed that her comment did not mention anyone by name and therefore could not be considered a personal insult. After reviewing the evidence, the court determined that the content of the comment, given its context and the accompanying photo, was clearly aimed at Ms. H and had harmed her reputation.

Based on Articles 34, 584, 585, and 592 of the 2015 Civil Code and relevant provisions of the 2015 Civil Procedure Code, the court ordered Ms. X to post a public apology on social media and pay Ms. H over VND 7 million in compensation for emotional distress.

The ruling highlights that even when a comment does not explicitly name someone, social media users can still be held legally responsible if their words can be reasonably linked to a specific person and cause harm to that person’s honor or reputation.