It can be both. The person harmed may file a civil suit for damages and, where justified, an injunction. Separately, the Penal Code makes defamation a criminal offence, and the aggrieved person can lodge a complaint before a magistrate. The two routes have different aims, standards of proof and timetables. A civil claim seeks compensation and correction, while a criminal complaint can lead to punishment of the publisher. Using both at once is sometimes possible but can look oppressive and may damage credibility with the court. We advise on which route, or which combination, fits the client's real objective.

Time limits are short, so act promptly. Civil claims for libel and slander are subject to a limitation period much shorter than for most contract claims, and delay can be fatal. Criminal complaints are not subject to the same limitation rule in every case, but long delay weakens a complaint and invites questions about motive. Online content complicates the picture, because republication, new posts and continued availability can raise arguments about when time starts. We check the dates of each publication, capture evidence of when and where it appeared, and advise on deadlines at the first meeting.

A company can protect its trading reputation, and both companies and their directors or officers may have claims over the same publication. A company's claim usually focuses on harm to its business, such as lost contracts, damage to banking relationships or investor concern. Individuals may claim for injury to personal reputation and standing. We assess who has the strongest claim and whether it is wise for the company, the individual or both to act. Sometimes one well-chosen claimant achieves more than several, and it avoids the impression that a powerful group is trying to silence its critics.

The main defences include truth published for the public good, fair comment on matters of public interest, good-faith reports of public proceedings, and statements made in good faith to protect the interests of the publisher or others. Their availability depends on the facts, the wording and the evidence the outlet holds. Prompt correction or a right of reply can also reduce liability. We review notes, sources, recordings and editorial records, and identify which defences can be proved, not merely asserted. Procedural points, such as defects in the complaint or a lack of standing, can end some cases early.

There are several routes, and the best one depends on the platform, the author and the urgency. Most platforms remove content that breaches their own policies on harassment, impersonation or false information, and a well-prepared report citing those policies often works fastest. Where content is unlawful under Bangladeshi law, requests may be routed through the telecoms regulator. Court orders can be sought against identified authors and, in some cases, used to support platform requests. We advise on the sequence, prepare the documents, and keep evidence that will be needed if the matter later becomes a formal defamation claim.

Sometimes, but it takes care, patience and a clear legal basis. Clues in the content, timing and connections often point to a likely author, and lawful investigation can strengthen that view. Platforms rarely disclose user data voluntarily, and orders requiring disclosure, particularly from foreign platforms, can be slow and uncertain. Law enforcement agencies have their own powers in criminal matters. We help clients assess what can realistically be achieved, avoid unlawful methods that could backfire, and decide whether to pursue identification at all or focus instead on removing the content and correcting the record with customers, lenders and regulators.

Usually, yes. A carefully drafted notice can secure a correction, apology or removal without litigation, and it shows the court that the claimant acted reasonably. It should identify the publication, explain why the statements are false and damaging, and set out what is required and by when. The tone matters: an aggressive notice can itself be published and become the story. We draft notices that are firm, accurate and suitable for public scrutiny, and advise on whether a private approach to the editor, author or platform should come first, and on what to do if the notice is ignored.

It may be possible where the content was accessed, read or downloaded in Bangladesh and caused harm here, but jurisdiction, service and enforcement all need careful thought. A Bangladeshi judgment against a foreign publisher or platform user may have limited practical effect if the publisher has no assets or presence in Bangladesh. In some cases, acting in the country where the publisher is based is simply more effective. We work with counsel in the UK, US, UAE, Singapore, India and China to compare options, considering defences, costs, time and the remedies each court can actually deliver.