Route III · Reviews
Removing a genuine review, and the routes that remain
Taking down a negative review because it is unwelcome carries its own legal risk: the ACCC says that “reviewing or removing a negative review that was genuinely created may mislead consumers.” A review that is false or abusive, rather than merely critical, is where the other routes in this guide come in, each with its own test.
General information, not legal advice. The ACCC is the official place to check on reviews; eSafety and your state or territory’s legal aid service on the other routes.
The ACCC’s line on removing reviews
“However, businesses need to be careful that they have an adequate basis to conclude that a review is likely to be fake or misleading before removing or editing it. Reviewing or removing a negative review that was genuinely created may mislead consumers.”
ACCC, Online reviews for products and servicesA review, set against each route
| Route | What the source says | Its test |
|---|---|---|
| eSafety’s adult cyber abuse scheme | “The Adult Cyber Abuse Scheme is not intended to regulate hurt feelings, purely reputational damage, bad online reviews, strong opinions or banter.” | Content aimed at one specific adult that is intended to cause serious harm and is menacing, harassing or offensive in all the circumstances. Route V |
| Defamation | Victoria Legal Aid says a person accused of defamation may be able to defend themselves by proving what they said is true, or by showing they were expressing an honest opinion. | For a company in Queensland, it must be an excluded corporation, and the harm must cause or be likely to cause serious financial loss. Route I |
| The consumer law | Section 18 of the Australian Consumer Law bans misleading or deceptive conduct in trade or commerce. | Conduct in trade or commerce that is misleading or deceptive, or likely to mislead or deceive. Route IV |
Set side by side, the three tests ask different questions: whether a specific adult’s health is at risk, whether a reputation has been seriously harmed, or whether conduct in trade has misled people.
The platform that hosts the review
A review usually sits on someone else’s platform, and defamation law has begun to address those platforms directly. On 22 September 2023, a majority of the Standing Council of Attorneys-General approved amendments to the Model Defamation Provisions on internet intermediary liability for third-party content. The DCJ lists among them:
- “Two conditional, statutory exemptions from defamation liability for a narrow group of internet intermediaries, including search engines in relation to organic search results”
- “A new innocent dissemination defence for internet intermediaries, subject to a simple complaints process (Model B)”
- “A new court power to make orders against non-party internet intermediaries to prevent access to defamatory matter online”
- “Updates to the mandatory requirements for an offer to make amends for online publications”
Where these apply depends on the state or territory. The DCJ says every jurisdiction except South Australia agreed to use best endeavours to enact them for 1 July 2024, and its page, last updated on 29 August 2024, lists them as enacted and commenced in NSW and the ACT on 1 July 2024. Queensland’s Defamation Act 2005, as current at 26 December 2025, now includes changes made by the Defamation and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2025: exemptions from liability for some digital intermediaries, including search engine providers (sections 10C and 10D), a defence for publications involving digital intermediaries (section 31A), and orders against non-party digital intermediaries (section 39A). The exemptions and the defence apply only to causes of action that arise after they commence, and in one narrow case not even to those (section 52); the new orders can be made after they commence, whatever the date of the cause of action (section 54). The DCJ’s summary does not set out how the complaints process works; it points to the amendments on the Australasian Parliamentary Counsel’s Committee website.
The clock on a review
An online review is a publication in electronic form. In Queensland, the year for a defamation claim runs from the day the matter was first uploaded for access, not from the day someone notices it. The notice that must come first, and how a late notice extends the year, are in the guide to concerns notices and time limits.