Production Firm Sues Actor Slavisa Curovic Over Montenegro Remarks

Production house LH marketing said on June 3 that it is filing a lawsuit against actor Slavisa Curovic following his public remarks about Montenegro. At the same time, the firm issued a public apology to the country’s citizens.

Curovic had stated openly that he was against the 2006 referendum and against Montenegro’s secession from Serbia. Those lines spread quickly across social media and, the company says, led to the end of their working relationship.

What exactly does the company hold against the actor?

LH marketing argues that Curovic’s comments were not a private matter, but that they reached both the company and the state where the firm operates. Director Momcilo Jovovic was blunt about it.

“Through his actions he has damaged the reputation of our company, but also of Montenegro’s state institutions,” said Momcilo Jovovic, director of LH marketing.

The firm is currently working on a project called “Dream Montenegro With Us”, so the apology was addressed to sponsors and audiences as well. The statement set out the following points:

• a lawsuit against the actor over the alleged harm to the reputation of the company and institutions
• an apology to Montenegrin citizens and to project partners
• an announcement that the work continues, but without Curovic on the team

Jovovic stressed that the project is not stopping and that the crew will move forward with new people. As far as the production is concerned, the collaboration with the actor is now formally over.

How did Slavisa Curovic react?

After his first comments, the actor faced a wave of insults and threats on social media. Rather than walk anything back, he stood by his position and answered briefly and sharply.

“Serbian identity is not for sale, you cowards!” Slavisa Curovic wrote.

That message split public opinion even further. To some it read as defiance, to others as fuel on an already heated argument. Either way, the tone between the actor and the production is now the opposite of what it was a few days earlier, when they were working on the same project.

The dispute is now moving from social media into a courtroom, where judges will weigh whether one actor’s statements could legally harm the reputation of a company and its institutions. Until then, the open question is where the line sits between a public figure’s personal stance and their professional responsibility to an employer.

So where do you draw that line when a public figure voices a political opinion?