Wednesday, July 2, 2025

Creating liberating content

Introducing deBridge Finance: Bridging...

In the dynamic landscape of decentralized finance (DeFi), innovation is a constant,...

Hyperliquid Airdrop: Everything You...

The Hyperliquid blockchain is redefining the crypto space with its lightning-fast Layer-1 technology,...

Unlock the Power of...

Join ArcInvest Today: Get $250 in Bitcoin and a 30% Deposit Bonus to...

Claim Your Hyperliquid Airdrop...

How to Claim Your Hyperliquid Airdrop: A Step-by-Step Guide to HYPE Tokens The Hyperliquid...
HomeSportsStretch Mark and...

Stretch Mark and Clitoris Treatment Leads to Lawsuit

A doctor from Gaia sued the director of the Academy of Esthetics after publications in which she felt attacked over treatments for stretch marks and the clitoris. The court decided not to hold the director liable because the right to freedom of expression was at stake.

According to News magazineThe case began with a comment on Instagram by Diogo Brandão, director of the Academy of Esthetics, criticizing two aesthetic procedures carried out at the clinic of Dr. Ana Souza in Gaia.

The clinic demanded compensation for moral damages in the amount of 10 thousand euros, considering the comment to be slanderous.

“Exchange ten stretch marks for ten stains? Don’t you realize how ridiculous that is? Have you lost your shame? I just wanted to see what it would look like after you sat down half a dozen times.” According to JN, this was one of the comments Diogo Brandao made in January 2021 that led to the case being filed. In December 2021, he wrote again and said: “The person doesn’t matter! The content matters! I saw the only article published about the treatment. It seems too subjective for this type of communication… Now I don’t understand one thing. Make no mistake: this must be a great Christmas present.”

The Porto Court of Appeal ruled that the director should not be held liable because his right to freedom of expression was at risk.

The prosecutor’s office sided with the defendant and stated that the publications constituted value judgments that did not mention the doctor or the clinic.

According to JN, the ruling revealed that judges Jorge M. Langweg, Maria Deolinda Dionisiso and Paula Cristina Jorge Pires argued that “despite the ironic, unorthodox, subjective and inelegant content” of the comments, “it is unclear whether the defendant imputes any characteristic, defect or behavior” to Dr. Ana Souza.

The judges also added that the APE director’s comments may be “unfair, inelegant and even medically unfounded and unjustified” but that a Gaia doctor “cannot intervene when the language used disturbs her or offends her sensitivities.”

Author: Morning mail
Source: CM Jornal

Get notified whenever we post something new!

Continue reading