Kramnik Sues Navara: A Battle Over Reputation Heads to Swiss Court

24.06.2025 18:24 | News

Vladimir Kramnik, former World Chess Champion, has filed a civil lawsuit in the Swiss canton of Geneva against Czech grandmaster David Navara and two major chess platforms—Chess.com and Chessdom.com.

The lawsuit, filed on June 24, 2025, is based on Article 28 of the Swiss Civil Code, which protects personal rights against defamatory and damaging statements. Kramnik claims that false information published by the defendants seriously harmed his reputation, dignity, and professional opportunities.

The dispute stems from an open letter published by David Navara on May 23, 2025, on Chess.com, titled Because We Care. In the article, Navara accused Kramnik of spreading toxic commentary and of causing him severe psychological distress. According to Kramnik, these claims were not only untrue but were also left uncorrected despite repeated requests. The day after the letter was published, the website Chessdom.com released a series of articles reinforcing Navara’s narrative and further portraying Kramnik as an aggressive and provocative figure.

Kramnik’s legal complaint points to a podcast by New in Chess, which allegedly shows that some of Navara’s original statements were later quietly edited. Yet no public correction or clarification was issued. The resulting media storm, Kramnik claims, led to direct threats and the cancellation of at least two of his professional engagements.


A Legal Precedent in the Making?

While defamation cases in the chess world are rare, the Swiss legal system already offers a notable precedent. In 2017, a court in Zurich fined a man 4,000 Swiss francs for simply “liking” defamatory content on Facebook. The court ruled that even passive online engagement—such as a like—could be considered a form of endorsement and dissemination of false claims. The case involved a series of offensive posts about animal rights activist Erwin Kessler, whom the posts falsely accused of racism and antisemitism. By “liking” the posts, the man effectively shared them with his social circle and was thus held legally responsible.

Kramnik’s lawsuit raises similar questions: Can a platform be held accountable for publishing or hosting unverified personal accusations? Do emotionally charged but potentially misleading open letters cross a legal line? And where should the boundary lie between free speech and reputational harm in the digital age?

What’s at Stake?

The lawsuit is not just a clash between two prominent chess players—it could shape how accountability is applied to digital speech in Switzerland and beyond. If the court rules in Kramnik’s favor, it may force online platforms to reexamine how they handle sensitive content and public accusations. It could also deter individuals from making unchecked public claims without being able to substantiate them.

More broadly, the outcome could influence how the global chess community—and other sports and public domains—treat issues of defamation, mental health allegations, and digital publishing ethics.

In Geneva, a new kind of endgame is unfolding. And the final move may not be played on a chessboard—but in a courtroom.

0x 905x Petr Koutný
Fotogalerie
Comments (0) Update Show only my comments