CIV § 45

Libel defined: false unprivileged publication (CIV § 45)

CIV § 45: Libel defined as false unprivileged publication by writing, picture, etc. that exposes a person to hatred, contempt, ridicule, or occupational injury.

Official text CIV § 45 — California

Libel is a false and unprivileged publication by writing, printing, picture, effigy, or other fixed representation to the eye, which exposes any person to hatred, contempt, ridicule, or obloquy, or which causes him to be shunned or avoided, or which has a tendency to injure him in his occupation.

Text as published in the 2026 snapshot of the code.

Source: Vaquill Open US Law, compiled from official state publishers (huggingface.co), reproduced under license CC BY 4.0.

Read this provision at the official source →

What it actually says

Section 45 defines libel: a false and unprivileged publication by writing, printing, picture, effigy or other fixed representation to the eye, which exposes any person to hatred, contempt, ridicule or obloquy, or which causes them to be shunned or avoided, or which has a tendency to injure them in their occupation. Four conditions have to be met and every one of them is a place a claim fails.

False. Truth is not a defence bolted on afterwards — falsity is written into the definition, so a statement that is substantially true is not libel however damaging or maliciously intended. Unprivileged. The privileges in § 47 are likewise part of the definition rather than an excuse, which is why statements in court papers, in official proceedings and in certain communications between interested persons are not libel at all. Published by a fixed representation to the eye. The section is not confined to newspapers: a post, a review, a group message, a sign, a photograph or a drawing all qualify, and publication means communication to someone other than the person defamed.

And the effect: hatred, contempt, ridicule, obloquy, being shunned or avoided, or a tendency to injure in occupation. That last limb is why accusations about someone's work — dishonesty, incompetence, misconduct in a trade — are the commonest libel claims. What the section does not include is anything about opinion, about damages, or about who has to prove what: those come from case law and from other sections, including the retraction and damages rules in § 48a. Whether a particular statement is one of fact rather than opinion, and whether a privilege applies, are the two questions that decide most of these disputes, and both belong with a lawyer.

When it applies

  • A post on a neighbourhood app accusing you of stealing parcels
  • An online review claiming a business cheated its customers
  • A written accusation of dishonesty circulated to colleagues
  • A letter to a professional body making false allegations about your work
  • A photograph or caption presenting you as something you are not
  • A group chat message repeating an allegation about you to others

What this section does not say

  • It does not reach a true statement. Falsity is part of the definition, so a substantially true statement is not libel whatever the motive for publishing it.
  • It does not cover spoken words. Oral statements are slander under § 46, which has its own list of categories.
  • It does not override the privileges. Section 47 makes statements in judicial, legislative and other official proceedings, and certain communications between interested persons, unprivileged only in defined exceptions.
  • It says nothing about opinion. The line between an assertion of fact and an expression of opinion is drawn by case law, not by this sentence.
  • Hurt feelings are not enough. The statement must expose the person to hatred, contempt, ridicule or obloquy, cause them to be shunned, or tend to injure them in their occupation.

Worked examples

Invented situations, written to show how the wording bites. They are not real cases, not judgments and not precedent, and nothing here predicts what would happen in yours.

Illustrative example

A post on a neighbourhood app names a resident and says they have been taking parcels from doorsteps. It is untrue, and it is read by hundreds of people locally.

How the wording applies

Libel under section 45 is a false and unprivileged written publication that exposes the person to hatred, contempt, ridicule or obloquy, or injures them in their occupation. Falsity is built into the definition, so what everything turns on is whether the accusation is substantially true, and separately whether the words assert a fact or express a suspicion, which is a line the section itself does not draw.

How the parties settled it

The post is deleted and replaced with a correction agreed in advance by both, left up for a stated period, and neither party discusses the matter further in the group.

Illustrative example

A review of a small business states as fact that it takes deposits and never does the work. The reviewer was a customer whose job was delayed but eventually completed.

How the wording applies

The statement is in writing and tends to injure the business in its occupation, so the question is falsity: never does the work is a factual assertion capable of being false, whereas saying the business was slow and would not be used again is opinion. It hinges on the completed job, which makes the specific assertion untrue whatever the reviewer felt about the delay.

How the parties settled it

The reviewer edits the review to describe the delay accurately, the business apologises in a public reply and refunds an agreed part of the fee, and both leave it there.

How courts have read it

Decisions construing this provision. The question and the summary are ours; the quoted sentence is the court's own words, taken from the published opinion. These are the decisions in our corpus, not every decision there is, and nothing here predicts any other case. Reported 1991 to 2017.

Copp v. Paxton, 45 Cal. App. 4th 829 (1996)

Court of Appeal

What the court had to decide

Whether certain statements in the three communications are actionable as defamation under Civil Code § 45.

What it held

Statements of opinion are not actionable as libel under Civil Code § 45 unless they imply provably false factual assertions.

In the court's words
Despite the broad statutory language, such opinions are not actionable as a matter of constitutional law.

Source: Caselaw Access Project, CC0 1.0 Universal (public domain dedication).

Related sections

CIV § 46 Slander Definition: 5 Categories | CIV § 46 CIV § 47 Litigation & common interest privilege CIV § 47 CIV § 3333 Full Compensation for All Detriment Caused | CIV § 3333

That's the law. Now let's settle your problem.

Say what is happening. A neutral mediator hears your side and the other party's, and walks you both to a written agreement. In the advanced settings you can ask for the decision to be reasoned on the California Codes.

This is with

Or open a session directly and invite the other party.

We copy this text from the official publisher and re-check it against that source on every page load, but we cannot guarantee it is complete, current or free of error, and we accept no liability for any reliance on it. An amendment can take effect before a consolidation catches up. The publisher's own copy is linked below; where the two differ, it is the official one that counts.

This page reproduces the text of CIV § 45 in force at the date shown and explains it in general terms. It is not legal advice and takes no account of the circumstances of your case, which can change the answer completely. For a live dispute, for limitation periods, and before taking any step in court, consult a qualified lawyer in California.

← All California law pages