Defamation in Malta: suing for libel and slander

An action under the Media and Defamation Act is barred one year from the date of publication (article 18 of Cap. 579), and for a republication of substantially the same statement the year runs from the first publication (article 13); the right of reply lapses if not claimed within one month of publication (article 15(2)(h)); a newspaper must publish the reply not later than the second issue after the request, a broadcaster or website not later than the second day (article 15(2)); the court sets a preliminary hearing within twenty days from the time allowed for the sworn reply (article 10(1)).

1. Preserve the statement. Take screenshots or printouts showing the full text, the date, the author's name or account, the URL and, for social media, the number of reactions and shares. For a broadcast, request or record a copy. For a printed newspaper, keep the original issue. If possible, have the capture witnessed or certified, because posts are often deleted once a complaint is made.

   Note who published it: the author, the editor of the newspaper or portal, or the publisher. Under article 3(3) of Cap. 579 you may sue the author, the editor or, if they cannot easily be identified, the publisher, but you may not bring separate actions against them for the same defamation. The Media Register kept by the Media Registrar shows registered editors (articles 19–20).

2. Assess whether the harm is serious. Article 3(4) of Cap. 579 provides that statements are not defamatory unless they cause or are likely to cause serious harm to the reputation of the specific person making the claim. A rude comment seen by a few people may not meet the threshold; an accusation of a crime, dishonesty or professional incompetence published widely usually will. For a company, harm must cause or be likely to cause serious financial loss.

   Think also about who can sue. The claimant must be identifiable in the statement. Close relatives or heirs may sue for defamation of a deceased person only if they show that their own reputation was harmed (article 17). Insults that are not published may still be a contravention under article 339(1)(e) of the Criminal Code.

3. Consider the defences the other side will raise. The defendant wins if the imputation is substantially true (article 4(1)), or if the statement was an opinion, indicated its basis, and an honest person could have held it on the basis of facts existing at the time of publication (article 4(2)). Publication on a matter of public interest is a defence where the defendant reasonably believed that publishing it was in the public interest (article 5).

   Some publications are privileged or immune: for example statements made under an Act of Parliament, certain official communications (article 7), peer-reviewed academic statements (article 6) and accurate reports of statements by public figures in written media (article 8). If the statement concerns you as a public figure, the courts allow wider criticism. A case that will fail on a defence is not worth filing.

4. Ask for a reply, correction or removal. Under article 15 of Cap. 579, a person who has been defamed, misrepresented or whose private life was intruded into is entitled to have a statement of contradiction or explanation published free of charge in the same medium. Send the request to the editor in writing within one month of publication; after that the right lapses (article 15(2)(h)).

   A newspaper must publish the reply, without comments and with appropriate prominence, not later than the second issue after receiving the request; a broadcaster or website within two days (article 15(2)). The reply must correct or explain facts, not express a different opinion, and must not itself be defamatory. At the same time you can ask the author or the operator of the website to take the post down and to apologise.

5. Try mediation or an apology. Many defamation cases end with a published apology and a contribution towards costs. You can propose this by letter or through a judicial letter before filing. The Act encourages it: at the preliminary hearing the court decides whether the action may be determined by mediation, agreement or apology, with or without payment (article 10(2)).

   When the court later fixes damages, it takes into account whether the defendant made or offered an apology and published a correction (article 11). An early written offer from you to settle in exchange for an apology is therefore useful evidence of your reasonableness, and the defendant's refusal may increase the award.

6. File the action within one year. The action is filed by sworn application before the competent civil court, following the Code of Organization and Civil Procedure (article 3(2) of Cap. 579). It is barred after one year from the date of publication (article 18). If the same statement is republished in substantially the same manner, the year still runs from the first publication (article 13(3)), unless the manner of the later publication is materially different (article 13(4)).

   The application must identify the statement, the defendant and the harm, and include your evidence: screenshots, witnesses who read or heard the statement and evidence of consequences such as lost clients. The defendant files a sworn reply; the court then appoints a preliminary hearing within twenty days from the time allowed for the reply (article 10(1)).

7. Know what the court can award. In libel proceedings the court may order the defendant to pay moral damages of up to €11,640, in addition to actual damages under any other law (article 9). In actions for slander the maximum moral damages are €5,000. In fixing the amount, the court considers the gravity and extent of the defamation, whether the defendant exercised due diligence and whether an apology or correction was offered (article 11).

   If you win, the court may also order the operator or editor of a website to remove the statement, and order distributors to stop selling or exhibiting material containing it (article 14). A false statement likely to damage a business can lead to a separate award of up to €11,640 for trade libel, in addition to actual damages (article 16).

8. Deal with anonymous online posts. If the statement was posted on a website by someone else, you may sue the editor of the website, who has a defence in mitigation of damages if it shows that it did not post the statement. That defence is defeated if you show that you could not identify the person who posted it, that you gave the editor a notice of complaint, and that the editor failed to respond or to act on it (article 12(2)–(3)). Write to the operator first, identify the post and ask for removal and for the identity of the poster.

   Journalists cannot be forced to reveal their sources, except where a court is satisfied that disclosure is necessary in a democratic society for reasons such as national security or the prevention of crime (article 22). For harassment or threats, rather than defamation, report to the police instead.

• Waiting more than a year. The action is barred one year after publication (article 18 of Cap. 579), and republication does not restart the clock (article 13).
• Suing over a statement that is unpleasant but not seriously harmful. Article 3(4) requires serious harm, or likely serious harm, to the claimant's reputation; weak cases end in costs against the claimant.
• Suing the author, editor and publisher separately. Article 3(3) forbids separate actions against them for the same defamation; choose the right defendant from the start.
• Missing the one-month window for the right of reply. After a month the editor is no longer obliged to publish your statement (article 15(2)(h)).
• Writing a reply that is itself defamatory or argues opinions. The editor may refuse it; a reply must correct or explain facts (article 15(1)).
• Expecting criminal prosecution. Criminal libel was abolished in 2018; only the civil action under Cap. 579 is available, apart from contraventions for insults or threats under the Criminal Code.
• Deleting your own evidence or responding with counter-accusations online. You may lose proof and expose yourself to a counter-claim.

Analyse my document →Legal guideContract templatesCountry home page

Last updated: 03/11/2026 · Sources: Media and Defamation Act (Cap. 579), arts 2–3 (defamation, libel, serious harm, who may be sued), Media and Defamation Act (Cap. 579), arts 4–8 (truth, honest opinion, public interest, privilege), Media and Defamation Act (Cap. 579), arts 9–18 (damages, preliminary hearing, website editors, single publication, removal, right of reply, one-year prescription), Criminal Code (Cap. 9), arts 252–254 (criminal defamation deleted by Act XI of 2018) and 339 (insults as contravention), legislation.mt, EUR-Lex

Explanations are generated from the official legal text and are indicative; only the full text, which every page links to, is binding. Europaius provides legal information, not legal services.