Civil Liability in the Conflict Between the Right to Honor and Freedom of Expression for Criticism in Crisis Contexts: Comments on Management During a Pandemic

Abstract

The recent ruling 12/2025 of the Supreme Court (Civil Chamber), dated January 7, exonerates a worker from civil liability in a senior residential care center after being sued by the center’s director for violating his right to honor; the judgment addresses a conflict between fundamental rights, namely, the right to honor versus the right to freedom of expression, in the context of media criticism regarding insufficient protective measures during the COVID-19 pandemic; the Supreme Court’s decision revokes the civil liability ruling for moral damages stemming from the alleged violation of the director’s right to honor, which had been previously upheld by the Provincial Court of Jaén; in the resolution of the cassation appeal, a balancing of two fundamental rights is carried out—the right to honor and the right to freedom of expression—taking into account their scope and elements; the Court determined that no such violation had occurred, as the information disclosed was of public interest due to the health crisis, was based on real facts, and did not include defamatory or offensive remarks; this work examines the evolution of the case from its resolution at the first-instance court and appellate stage to the Supreme Court’s final ruling, highlighting the legal principles applied and the broader legal implications of this decision in the context of a crisis.