Serious harm has to be proved. From the page.
The law of England and Wales stopped presuming damage. Under section 1 of the Defamation Act 2013 a statement is not defamatory unless it has caused or is likely to cause serious harm to reputation, and a body trading for profit must show serious financial loss. You have one year from publication to bring the claim. All of that is proved from a page that somebody can delete in one click.
Works on Chrome and Edge. From $4.99 (approx. £3.90) as a one-off, or a 7-day trial that requires a credit card.
In England and Wales, section 1 of the Defamation Act 2013 means a statement is not defamatory unless publication has caused or is likely to cause serious harm, and you have one year to sue. ProofSnap captures the post and its reach as a hashed, signed, eIDAS-timestamped evidence package before it is deleted.
The serious harm threshold turned defamation in England and Wales into an evidence exercise. For a body that trades for profit, section 1(2) of the Defamation Act 2013 adds a second hurdle: harm to reputation is not serious harm unless it has caused or is likely to cause the body serious financial loss. The limitation period is one year from publication and sits in section 4A of the Limitation Act 1980, not in the Defamation Act 2013, while the single publication rule in section 8 of the 2013 Act means the clock generally runs from the first publication rather than restarting each time the page is served again. Proving what was published, to whom, and how far it travelled is therefore the whole exercise, and every part of it lives on a page that somebody can delete in one click.
ProofSnap captures the post, the profile, the comment thread and the visible engagement as a package of 11 to 15 files depending on the plan, holding the full-page screenshot, the saved source, the URL, the UTC capture time, a SHA-256 hash of every file, an RSA-4096 signature over the manifest and an eIDAS qualified timestamp from Disig a.s., a Qualified Trust Service Provider on the EU Trusted List. From $4.99 (approx. £3.90) as a one-off.
By Radim Motycka, Founder and Lead Engineer, ProofSnap · · Independently verifiable via Trust Verifier
Why this goes wrong so often
The post comes down, and the case comes down with it
People delete defamatory posts, usually because somebody told them to, and that happens long before your solicitor sees the file.
Deleted before you get advice
The gap between reading something about yourself and instructing a solicitor is usually days. That is more than enough time for the post, the account or the whole page to disappear, and platforms are not obliged to keep a copy for you.
Serious harm is argued from the spread
The serious harm threshold means you put harm in evidence rather than assume it. For an online publication that means how far it travelled: shares, views, comments, who engaged, and the size of the audience. All of it is on the page, and only while the page is live.
One year, running from publication
The limitation period is one year, and the single publication rule means it generally runs from the first publication rather than restarting. Deciding slowly is the same as deciding not to.
What the law of England and Wales now asks of a claimant
These are the fixed points. Each one is answered with documents, and each document is a web page.
Serious harm, section 1(1)
Section 1(1) of the Defamation Act 2013 reads: A statement is not defamatory unless its publication has caused or is likely to cause serious harm to the reputation of the claimant.
It is a threshold met on evidence of actual or likely impact, not on how unpleasant the words are.
Serious financial loss, section 1(2)
Section 1(2) of the Defamation Act 2013 adds that harm to the reputation of a body that trades for profit is not "serious harm" unless it has caused or is likely to cause the body serious financial loss.
A trading company therefore proves money, not offence, so document the commercial consequence as it happens. Where the statement is a review, see how to preserve a fake Google review as evidence.
One year, and the single publication rule
The limitation period is one year from publication, and it sits in section 4A of the Limitation Act 1980 rather than in the Defamation Act 2013. Section 8 of the Defamation Act 2013 introduced the single publication rule, so time generally runs from the first publication of the same or substantially the same material rather than restarting on each new access.
How the evidence is proved
A capture that documents its own integrity answers the practical question a court asks about a web page. Under CPR rule 32.19 a party is deemed to admit the authenticity of a disclosed document unless it serves a notice to prove, so the strength of your record shapes whether the other side bothers. The Civil Evidence Act 1995, which governs hearsay and business records in this context, extends to England and Wales only by its section 16(4).
Capture the reach, not just the words
The most common gap in a defamation file in England and Wales is proof of extent and consequence, which is exactly what the serious harm threshold demands. Capture the post together with what is visible around it: the share count, the view count, the comment thread, the reactions, the size of the group or page it appeared on, and any reposts you can find. Capture each as its own record on the day you find it. If you are a business, capture the downstream consequence too, such as a cancelled order thread or a review page. Capture before you complain to the platform, not after: section 5 of the Defamation Act 2013 gives a website operator a defence where it shows it did not post the statement, and a complaint under that regime often ends with the material coming down before anyone has preserved it.
The most common mistake
There is no such thing as UK defamation law
The United Kingdom has three defamation regimes, not one. Section 17(2) of the Defamation Act 2013 extends the Act to England and Wales only, apart from a handful of sections that also reach Scotland. Getting the jurisdiction wrong changes the test, the clock and sometimes the outcome.
| Jurisdiction | Governing statute | Serious harm test | Limitation and single publication |
|---|---|---|---|
| England and Wales | Defamation Act 2013, in force 1 January 2014 | Yes, section 1(1), plus serious financial loss for a body trading for profit under section 1(2) | One year under section 4A of the Limitation Act 1980; single publication rule in section 8 of the 2013 Act |
| Scotland | Defamation and Malicious Publication (Scotland) Act 2021, in force 8 August 2022 | Yes, but its own test in section 1 of the Scottish Act, not section 1 of the 2013 Act | Section 32 of the Scottish Act shortens the limitation period and applies a single limitation period running from first publication |
| Northern Ireland | The Defamation Act 2013 was never extended to Northern Ireland, where defamation is a devolved matter | No statutory serious harm threshold | Governed by Northern Ireland limitation legislation, not by the 2013 Act; take local advice |
Treat any source that says "UK defamation law" with caution, because it is almost always describing the law of England and Wales. The capture is the same in all three jurisdictions: the post, the profile, the thread and the visible engagement, sealed and timestamped on the day you find them. What differs is the test the material has to satisfy afterwards, which is a question for a solicitor admitted in that jurisdiction. If the material is an intimate image rather than a defamatory statement, the route is a takedown rather than a libel claim, and the evidence needs are set out in our guide to intimate image takedown evidence in the UK.
How to capture a defamatory post: three steps, about forty seconds
No forensic training required. The proof is in the package, not in your testimony about how careful you were.
Capture the publication and its reach
The post, the profile behind it, the comment thread and any reshares. Each capture records the URL and the UTC time, so the sequence of what appeared when is preserved.
The package seals and timestamps itself
SHA-256 for every file, an RSA-4096 signature over the manifest, an eIDAS qualified timestamp and an anchor to the Bitcoin blockchain, so the date of your capture cannot be moved.
Hand it to your solicitor as one file
The PDF evidence report reads like a document and the ZIP verifies in a browser. Your solicitor gets a file to build a letter of claim from rather than a folder of loose images.
What lands in the evidence package
Between 11 and 15 files depending on your plan, delivered as one ZIP that anyone can check without installing anything.
Full-page screenshot
The whole page, not just the visible window, stitched and hashed.
Saved page source
The document as rendered at capture time, including the head, meta tags and structured data.
Extracted page text
Searchable plain text, so a quote can be found and cited without retyping.
Technical metadata
URL, page title, HTTP response headers, browser, operating system and the capture time in UTC.
Signed manifest
SHA-256 for every file, signed with an RSA-4096 key whose public key ships in the package.
Blockchain timestamp
The manifest hash anchored to Bitcoin via OpenTimestamps, so the capture time cannot be backdated.
Chain of custody and forensic log
A record of what happened during the capture, in the order it happened.
Evidence report as PDF
A readable summary you can attach to an application, a notice or a report.
Verification instructions
Written steps plus scripts, so the other side can re-check the hashes offline.
Anyone can verify it, including the other side. Drop the ZIP onto the public Trust Verifier and the hashes, the signature and the timestamp are checked in the browser. Nothing is uploaded and nothing depends on ProofSnap still existing.
Three ways to get the evidence
Prices are charged in USD. Approximate sterling figures are shown for orientation only, and your card issuer sets the actual rate.
One dispute
$4.99 once
charged in USD, approx. £3.90
A SnapPack is a single up-front purchase for a set number of captures. No subscription, no auto-renewal, no trial. Best when you have one problem and you want it documented today.
Get a SnapPackOngoing matters
$8.99/month
charged in USD, approx. £7 per month
For anyone who captures regularly: practitioners, property managers, HR, investigators. The 7-day free trial requires a credit card. Cancel any time during the trial and you are not charged.
Start the 7-day trialWe do it for you
$44.99 per URL
charged in USD, approx. £35 per URL
Send us the link and our team captures the package for you, with nothing to install. Useful when the capture should not come from a party to the dispute.
See the capture serviceProofSnap is not a law firm and does not give legal advice. This reflects the position as at 3 August 2026. Qualified timestamps are issued by Disig a.s., a Qualified Trust Service Provider on the EU Trusted List. Their effect in the UK is a matter of UK domestic law, not EU law: Article 24A of the assimilated Regulation (EU) No 910/2014, inserted by SI 2019/89, lists Article 41(2) among the provisions for which an EU qualified trust service is treated as qualified in the UK, so the qualified timestamp carries the Article 41(2) presumption of the accuracy of the date and time and of the integrity of the data it is bound to. That presumption covers time and integrity, nothing else. Section 131 of the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025 contains a power to remove that recognition; it is not yet in force and no regulations have been made under it.
Official sources
Every figure and deadline on this page comes from the following primary sources. Check them yourself rather than taking our word for it.
- Defamation Act 2013, section 1 the serious harm threshold, and serious financial loss for a body trading for profit in section 1(2).
- Defamation Act 2013, section 8 the single publication rule. Sections 2, 3 and 4 carry the defences of truth, honest opinion and publication on a matter of public interest, and section 5 the website operator's defence.
- Defamation Act 2013, section 17 extent. The Act extends to England and Wales only, apart from sections 6, 7(9), 15, part of 16(5) and 17, which also extend to Scotland.
- Limitation Act 1980, section 4A where the one-year limitation period for defamation actually sits, as substituted by the Defamation Act 1996.
- Defamation and Malicious Publication (Scotland) Act 2021 the Scottish regime, in force 8 August 2022, with its own serious harm test in section 1 and its own limitation and single publication provision in section 32.
- Civil Evidence Act 1995, section 16(4) extent: "This Act extends to England and Wales." Sections 8 and 9 cover proof of statements in documents and business records.
- CPR Part 32 the evidence rules, including the notice to prove a document in rule 32.19.
- Assimilated Regulation (EU) No 910/2014, Article 24A inserted by SI 2019/89, it lists Article 41(2) among the provisions for which an EU qualified trust service is treated as qualified in the UK.
Confirm the law of the jurisdiction where you would sue rather than assuming that the rules of England and Wales travel across the United Kingdom. Scotland and Northern Ireland have their own regimes, set out in the table above.
Questions people actually ask
One year to act. The post may not last the week.
Capture the publication and its reach while both are still visible, then take advice.