It is to be questioned, actually. We have defamation laws in France (and there are some flavor of them about all over the place) and when you make a review you should always either sustain your claim and present it as fact (to avoid defamation) or present it as your own opinion (in there you have free speech). The limit is often blurry, but you cannot call the president (or anyone for that matter) a thief unless you have proof. You can however say that you think he is a thief. Of course, there is context that helps quite a bunch here.
In this case, the title of the article was presented as a fact (The place to avoid at Cap-Ferret: Il Giardino) and in the search results page it was completely out of context.
So all in all, I think there was at least reasonable doubt and the trial doesn't surprise me all that much. The claim of the restaurant was even very limited: removing its name from the title.
Now, if you want to live in a place with "real" free speech, good luck with that. But whenever someone Google-Bomb you with accusation of pedophilia, well, good luck.