• Sectors we work in banner(2)

    Quick Reads

Based on a True Story: Disclaimers in Film and Television – Case Update

min read

In August, we discussed the filing of a USD 170 million lawsuit against Netflix in California. The claimant, Fiona Harvey, is the real-life inspiration behind one of the characters in the Netflix mega hit, ‘‘Baby Reindeer.’’ Ms Harvey, who apparently resembles Martha, a character portrayed on the show as a relentless stalker, is suing Netflix on the basis that the show was presented as a ‘‘true story.’’ However, there were some significant deviations from reality in the storyline which were nevertheless presented as true. Subsequently, Ms Harvey brought a claim for defamation, intentional infliction of emotional distress and negligence.

Latest US Court Ruling 

A US district judge has ruled that Ms Harvey may proceed with her defamation claim. In Judge Gary Klausner's decision, he highlights the significant disparity between the real-life allegations against Ms Harvey and the actions of her fictional counterpart, Martha, in the series. The judge pointed out that the show's portrayal of Martha included acts of sexual assault and violence that were not part of the accusations against Ms Harvey.

The ruling also touches on the potential demonstration of "actual malice" by Netflix. This stems from a Sunday Times article suggesting that Netflix was aware the story had been fictionalised but still chose to present it as factual. Actual malice is a critical factor in defamation cases, especially involving public figures, and refers to the defendant knowing a statement is false or acting with reckless disregard for the truth.

Despite not being named in the series, Ms Harvey was identifiable to the public, leading to severe emotional distress and threats against her. The judge acknowledged that Netflix should have foreseen this outcome and taken steps to prevent it.

While the judge dismissed Ms Harvey's claims for negligence, violation of publicity rights, and punitive damages, he allowed the claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress to proceed. This claim addresses the false statements made about Martha that could be considered "extreme and outrageous."

Fact or Fiction? 

The case serves as a cautionary tale for producers about the implications of labeling projects as true when they contain significant fictional elements. By stating "This is a true story" at the beginning of each episode, Netflix set an expectation of factual accuracy, which was not met. The lawsuit will now focus on whether Ms Harvey can prove defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress by Netflix's portrayal of her.

Disclaimers are not just a formality; they are a crucial tool in preventing defamation claims. By clearly defining the boundary between fact and fiction, accurate disclaimers protect both the subjects of dramatisations and the creators, managing audience expectations and reducing the risk of legal action. Therefore, they need to be considered carefully.

US district judge Gary Klausner noted that because the show’s episodes begin with the line “This is a true story”, it invited viewers to take the story as fact.

Our thinking

  • In-House Insights: Next Gen Drinks Reception

    Events

    min read
  • The UAE's New Civil Code: Implications for Construction Contracts

    Maher Al Nashar

    Events

    min read
  • India-UAE BIT 2024: What to Expect When You’re Investing

    Thomas R. Snider

    Insights

    min read
  • Charles Russell Speechlys advises long standing client SPS on its acquisition of Cleardata

    Hamish Perry

    News

    min read
  • The Increased Expedited Procedure Threshold under the 2026 ICC Rules: What Does It Mean for Mid-Value Construction Disputes in the UAE?

    Glenn Bull

    Insights

    min read
  • Darren Bailey sits on the judging panel for City AM's Football Power List

    Darren Bailey

    In the Press

    min read
  • New 2026 ICC Rules of Arbitration: what’s changed and what it means

    Thomas R. Snider

    Insights

    min read
  • The Dubai Conflicts of Jurisdiction Tribunal Continues to Define the Boundaries of DIFC and Onshore Dubai Court Jurisdiction in Arbitral Award Recognition and Enforcement

    Thomas R. Snider

    Insights

    min read
  • Disputes Over Donuts: Spotlight on the ICC Arbitration Rules 2026

    Thomas R. Snider

    Podcasts

  • The New UAE Civil Code: A Series Overview

    Glenn Bull

    Insights

    min read
  • New Swiss succession law on the transfer of businesses

    Grégoire Uldry

    Insights

    min read
  • Paula Boast MBE comments on the UK-GCC free trade agreement in Gulf Daily News

    Paula Boast MBE

    In the Press

    min read
  • Extra Time: Evolution of Technology in Sport

    Anna Sowerby

    Podcasts

  • Mark Bailey reflects on the UK's planned Cyber Security Bill in Security Brief and Ecommerce News

    Mark Bailey

    In the Press

    min read
  • Functional Food and Drink in 2025: Why Gut Health and Cognitive Performance are Driving UK M&A

    Imogen Brown

    Insights

    min read
  • US citizens moving to the UK part 1: Immigration, visas and work authorisations

    Sangna Chauhan

    Quick Reads

    min read
  • Switzerland plans further restrictions to buying real estate

    Oliver Schreier

    Quick Reads

    min read
  • A New Chapter for UAE Competition Law: Inside Cabinet Decision No. 59 of 2026

    Mo Nawash

    Insights

    min read
  • Decennial Liability and Subcontractors under the New UAE Civil Code: Articles 821 to 824

    Glenn Bull

    Insights

    min read
  • Navigating the Rise of AI-Generated DSARs and complaints – our top tips

    Janine Regan

    Quick Reads

    min read
Back to top