You do not have to verify reviews: the duty is to provide information. If you display reviews, explain whether and how you ensure they come from real customers. If you do not verify them, say so. Truthfulness is the boundary: labelling reviews as verified without real checks, or publishing commissioned fake reviews, is an unfair commercial practice. The same principle applies in Slovakia and Czechia.
Must you investigate who wrote every review? No. The law lets you choose whether to verify reviews, but requires customers to know where they stand. The problem lies in pretending reviews are verified.
The duty is to provide information
Slovak Act No. 108/2024 Coll. treats review verification information as material information whose concealment is a misleading omission:
Material information under paragraphs 1 and 2 also includes information on (a) whether and how the trader ensures that product reviews originate from consumers who actually bought or used the product, where the trader gives consumers access to product reviews.
— Section 11(6)(a) of Act No. 108/2024 Coll. (unofficial English translation)
If you do not verify reviews, say so. If you do, explain how, for example by allowing reviews only from customers with completed orders. Place the information where reviews appear: material information hidden or presented inappropriately is a misleading omission just like withheld information (Section 11(2)). Czech interpretative practice reaches the same conclusion, as explained below.
Where the unfair-practice boundary lies
Annex 1 to Act No. 108/2024 Coll. lists practices always considered unfair (Section 9(5)). These include claiming reviews come from actual customers without taking reasonable verification steps, publishing or commissioning fake reviews, and misrepresenting reviews. A “verified reviews” label without a functioning mechanism is therefore prohibited in all circumstances. Deleting negative reviews while retaining positive ones falls into the same category because the resulting picture is no longer truthful.
This also matters during inspections: when the Slovak Trade Inspection checks an online shop remotely, it takes screenshots of the review-policy page too, as illustrated in SOI inspections based on screenshots.
The position in Czechia
The Czech rules mirror this: under Section 5a(5) of Act No. 634/1992 Coll., information on whether and how the seller ensures published reviews come from actual customers is material information. The Czech Trade Inspection’s “Reviews” FAQ on coi.gov.cz adds practical details: the amendment introduced no duty to verify; information must appear directly beside published reviews, as terms and conditions alone are insufficient; older reviews may remain, but their verification status must also be stated; verified and unverified reviews may be mixed if clearly distinguished; and a review of a product supplied free for testing must be labelled sponsored. Fake reviews are also always prohibited in Czechia: the Inspection refers to points (y) and (z) of Annex 1 to the Czech Consumer Protection Act.
If you sell in both countries, one honest verification process and one explanation beside reviews can cover both jurisdictions. Differences concern supervisory details rather than the principle.
How we can help
We configure review collection and verification wording through our online shop terms service. Our influencer agreement covers paid partnerships and products supplied for testing, including required labels. If a supervisory authority challenges your reviews or labels, our e-commerce legal services prepare the response.
Before adding a “verified purchase” label, have its underlying process checked: that label is precisely what the authority compares with reality.
This answer provides general information on the law as at 29 August 2026. It does not constitute legal services or replace an assessment of an individual case. The details of your situation may differ. Book a consultation to discuss them.
