Compensation for non-material damage due to the publication of untrue information in the media

In accordance with the Law on Obligations, every person has the right to compensation for damages due to a violation of psychological integrity. One of the violations of psychological integrity is reflected in the publication of untrue information about a person.

Namely, both the Constitution and the international acts to which Montenegro is a signatory stipulate that the psychological integrity of every person is inviolable. Therefore, as a result of the violation of the same right, persons whose psychological integrity has been violated have the right to monetary compensation in the name of injury to honor and reputation, as well as the right to have the judgment awarding them monetary compensation published in the newspaper that published the untrue news.

It is necessary to distinguish the violation of honor and reputation from public criticism, and in this regard, public persons cannot demand compensation in the name of violation of honor and reputation due to public criticism of their work, since the threshold of tolerance of public persons must be higher than the threshold of tolerance of those who do not have such a role in society.

Public figures are understood to mean anyone who performs a public function, or otherwise has an influence in society, and whose appearance or actions attract the attention of the public to a greater extent.

Monetary compensation in the name of injury to honor and reputation represents a fair satisfaction that compensates a certain person for suffering suffered due to experiencing stress or other negative emotions due to untrue allegations that are available to the general public, or in short, due to "negative advertising".

It must be borne in mind that three conditions must be met in order for someone to be entitled to compensation in general. The first condition is that the damage occurred, that is, that in the specific case, a falsehood was published, that is, in a way that proves that the news is false. Therefore, one cannot talk about the publication of untruth, if the one who demands monetary compensation cannot prove that it is untruth.

The second condition is that the damage was caused by a specific pest, i e in a specific medium. Therefore, monetary compensation or other form of satisfaction can be demanded only if the media has published an untruth. Therefore, the evidence possessed by the injured party must be connected directly to the medium from which satisfaction is demanded.

And the third condition is that there is a cause-and-effect relationship between the actions of the perpetrator and the damage caused to the victim. Therefore, there must be a position of the media that was directly expressed, and completely conveyed information that is untrue, and that caused a serious injury to the injured person's honor and reputation, which must be proven.

All of this is for the purpose of explaining that compensation for non-material damage due to injury to honor and reputation cannot be sought in situations where the injury does not exist or the information was published for the purpose of reporting on a topic of public interest, or the information was obtained by a state authority.

In those situations, in my opinion, there can be no right to fair compensation required from the media, because the media did not convey its position, nor did it provide complete information about the person that is untrue, or it received the information from a state authority.