A damaging public statement does not necessarily refer to a specific individual.
Sometimes, the author attributes negative characteristics to a whole group of people, portrays them as a threat or uses language that could be seen as demeaning. Statements of this kind frequently concern LGBTQ+ people.
This raises the question: can a member of the targeted community bring a lawsuit seeking compensation or an apology, even if they were not named directly? We decided to look into this.
Personal rights are specific to each individual
Polish civil law protects an individual’s personal rights, including their honour and dignity. If a person’s personal rights have been threatened or infringed, they may seek, among other remedies, the cessation of further actions, an apology, or damages.
Doubts arise when harmful words are directed not at a specific individual but at an entire group. The traditional view is that infringement must concern a specific, identifiable person. After all, the protection of personal rights is not intended to serve as a means of challenging every offensive statement about society or a segment of it.
However, this does not mean that statements directed at a group always go unpunished.
Is it necessary to name someone to offend them?
The line is not clear-cut. Relevant factors include whether the group can be defined, how many members it has, the context of the statement and whether its content also objectively undermines the dignity of a specific individual who belongs to that group.
A good example is the case concerning Kaja Godek’s public statements about homosexual people. The lawsuit was brought by 16 members of the LGBTQ+ community. Initially, the court dismissed their claims, ruling that the statements referred to a broad group of people rather than the claimants directly.
The Warsaw Court of Appeal, however, disagreed. It held that protection cannot be excluded solely on the grounds that a damaging statement concerns a larger number of people. The case was remanded, and in February 2025 the Regional Court in Warsaw found that the claimants’ honour and dignity had been infringed and ordered that an apology be issued.
Not every statement justifies a lawsuit
This does not mean that a general right to bring a lawsuit on behalf of an entire community has been established. Each case requires an individual assessment.
First and foremost, the court should examine whether the statement in question actually infringes the specific claimant’s personal rights, and not merely their beliefs, worldview, or sense of identification with a particular group. The form of the statement, its context, and the limits of freedom of expression are also material considerations.
This is precisely why pursuing such claims can be difficult. A claimant must not only demonstrate that the statement was offensive or damaging, but also convincingly justify why it infringed their personal rights.
How to pursue protection effectively
Public debate can be fierce, and freedom of expression extends to controversial and critical statements. It is not, however, unlimited.
An increasingly important question is whether the law should remain powerless in the face of offensive words directed not at a single person, but at entire communities. Recent case law demonstrates that the absence of a specific target does not always preclude effective legal protection.
What is decisive, however, is a thorough preparation of the case: a careful analysis of the content of the statement, its context, the audience it reached, and its impact on the position of the specific individual concerned.
The assistance of an experienced lawyer can be particularly valuable in such cases. They can properly assess whether there are grounds for bringing a claim, select appropriate remedies and present arguments that account for both the right to protection of dignity and the limits of freedom of expression.
Questions? Contact us
