Collien Fernandes: Hamburg court backs SPIEGEL on Ulmen report

Collien Fernandes is back at the center of a legal fight after the Pressekammer of the Hamburg Regional Court ruled on Thursday that SPIEGEL’s March 19 reporting on Christian Ulmen was overwhelmingly lawful and appropriate. The decision lets most of the article remain in place, including the allegations that Ulmen used fake profiles and deepfake material tied to his ex-wife.

March 19 is the date that set this case in motion. SPIEGEL’s article said Fernandes had reported Ulmen to authorities in Spain and described alleged conduct that included deceptively real-looking social-media profiles, contact with hundreds of men, sexual chats carried out while posing as Fernandes, and erotic images and videos that gave the impression they showed her.

Hamburg court on Ulmen

The Hamburg court allowed SPIEGEL to keep reporting the allegations involving digital violence and physical assaults. In its written reasoning, the court described the relevant passages as “zulässige Verdachtsberichterstattung,” called the article “nicht vorverurteilend,” and said it created “keine unzulässige Prangerwirkung.”

The judges also said the suspicion around deepfake videos could be described “in zulässiger Weise verbreitet.” Their reasoning went further, stating: “Insbesondere liegt der notwendige Mindestbestand an Beweistatsachen dafür vor, der Antragsteller [Ulmen] habe von Dritten erstellte Deepfake-Videos, welche seine Ex-Frau zeigen, verbreitet.” For readers tracking the dispute, that keeps the core of the reporting standing rather than pulling it from public view.

Spain passage changed

Only one side point drew an injunction: a procedural detail about an investigative proceeding against Ulmen in Spain. That leaves the main allegations intact while forcing a narrow edit in the article’s handling of the Spanish process.

Ulmen and his lawyers did not dispute the allegations in court, and the March version carried Fernandes’s quoted line, “Du hast mich virtuell vergewaltigt.” The immediate practical result is simple: SPIEGEL can continue publishing most of the report, while the fight narrows to one procedural detail and the remaining legal remedies Ulmen may still pursue.