German Court Protects Free Speech in 'Toxic' and 'Manipulative' Case

A medium's attempt to silence a client's scathing review backfired—now, even brutal professional critiques are shielded by law. What does this mean for future disputes?

, and Administrator

2026 March 24 . 5:06 AM

1 min read

The image shows a man in a white shirt and glasses speaking into a microphone in front of a blurred... — The image shows a man in a white shirt and glasses speaking into a microphone in front of a blurred background. He appears to be making a statement, likely in response to the Supreme Court's decision to ban the use of the Supreme Judicial Court of India.

German Court Protects Free Speech in 'Toxic' and 'Manipulative' Case

A German court has ruled that calling someone 'toxic' and 'manipulative' falls under free speech protections. The decision came after a 'consciousness trainer' and 'medium' tried to block a client from making these remarks about her professional conduct. The Higher Regional Court of Frankfurt am Main confirmed the ruling is now final.

The case centred on comments made by a client about the plaintiff, who works as a 'consciousness trainer' and 'medium'. The defendant described her as 'toxic' and 'manipulative', but the court found these statements were opinions about her professional behaviour—not personal attacks. Judges determined that freedom of expression covers both valuable and worthless, correct and incorrect statements.

The court also clarified that the remarks were not false claims of fact but permissible expressions of opinion. Since the ruling is final, no further appeals can be made. This decision follows a separate January 2026 ruling by the same court, which set stricter privacy rules for tabloid reporting on non-public figures' relationships.

The final ruling reinforces that even harsh criticism of professional conduct can be protected under free speech laws. The case sets a precedent for similar disputes, though its broader impact on earlier media law decisions remains unclear. The plaintiff's attempt to silence the client's remarks has now been definitively rejected.