• 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

  • The Playbook to Superscale: Hacks 4-6

    Events

    min read
  • That’s what no one said: DIFC Court annuls award based on unpleaded findings

    Aishwarya Nair

    Insights

    min read
  • International confidence grows in Saudi Arabia as an arbitral seat

    Peter Smith

    Insights

    min read
  • Kurt Rademacher comments in Eprivateclient regarding the possible impact of the US mid-term elections on UHNWIs

    In the Press

    min read
  • Virtual Currency Regulation: United Arab Emirates

    Sara Sheffield

    Insights

    min read
  • Paul Arathoon comments in The Banker, Finextra and others about Revolut’s mooted dual listing in the UK and US

    Paul Arathoon

    In the Press

    min read
  • Arbitration of Trust Disputes Webinar

    Thomas R. Snider

    Events

    min read
  • Easy come, easy go? A new consideration for temporary non-residents

    Christopher Gothard

    Insights

    min read
  • Darren Bailey writes in City AM about what European football could learn from the US sports law landscape

    Darren Bailey

    In the Press

    min read
  • Simon Ridpath features in the latest episode of the Non-Billable podcast

    Simon Ridpath

    In the Press

    min read
  • Charles Russell Speechlys strengthens Middle East Corporate practice with appointment of Philip O’Riordan

    Patrick Gearon FCIArb

    News

    min read
  • Charles Russell Speechlys celebrates US team recognition in Best Lawyers in America® 2027

    Karen Yates

    News

    min read
  • Costs in DIFC Employment Cases: Two New Decisions Confirm the Strength of Practice Direction 1/2025

    Peter Smith

    Quick Reads

    min read
  • Qatar’s New Preliminary Registration Framework: A Transformative Step for the Off-Plan Market

    Ahmad Anani

    Insights

    min read
  • CasinoBeats quotes Darren Bailey on player betting bans and sports gambling partnerships

    Darren Bailey

    In the Press

    min read
  • Pay Up or We'll Tell All: The High Court's Firm Stance on Blackmail in Privacy Cases

    Hannah Gornall

    Quick Reads

    min read
  • Why the UK-India Trade Deal Matters for Private Capital

    Kim Lalli

    Quick Reads

    min read
  • Reaz Jafri quoted in CNBC on EU crackdown on Caribbean "golden passport" programmes

    In the Press

    min read
  • Charles Russell Speechlys named a ‘Firm to Watch’ by India Business Law Journal

    News

    min read
  • Arbitrating Construction Disputes – Comparing the ICC, LCIA, SIAC and SCCA Rules

    Christopher O'Brien

    Insights

    min read
Back to top