Meta Faces Australian Class Action Over Alleged Harm to Young Users

Meta faces an Australian class action alleging that Facebook and Instagram harmed young users through addictive features and harmful content. Reuters reported on October 22 that law firm MinterEllison had filed the Federal Court proceeding that month on behalf of eight plaintiffs seeking compensation for harm allegedly suffered before they turned 18. These are allegations in a newly reported case, not findings of liability.

According to Reuters, a court order made on Monday restricted identification of the applicants and publication of the statement of claim. The publicly available report therefore does not provide a basis for describing every pleaded allegation or the private circumstances of the people involved. Meta did not immediately respond to Reuters’ request for comment on the lawsuit.

The case arrives against the background of Australia’s social-media minimum-age rules, but those rules and this damages claim address different questions. A restriction on holding an account does not itself decide whether a company is legally responsible for harm alleged in a court proceeding. Nor does a lawsuit establish that every young user has experienced the same effects.

Australia’s eSafety Commissioner explains that, from December 10, 2025, covered platforms must take reasonable steps to prevent children under 16 from holding accounts. The responsibility falls on the platforms; children, parents and carers are not subject to penalties under that account restriction. Facebook and Instagram are among the services covered.

The rules do not amount to a ban on everything a child can see online. Public material may remain accessible without an account, while many standalone messaging, gaming, education and health services are treated differently. eSafety also cautions that an exemption does not make a service automatically safe. Age restrictions are one part of online safety, rather than a guarantee that harmful experiences disappear.

In an August statement, Meta said it had removed access to more than 750,000 Facebook and Instagram accounts believed to belong to Australians under 16 by June 30. That was an account count, not a count of individual children. The company described age-detection systems, easier reporting of suspected underage accounts and measures to hinder re-registration.

Meta also argued for age signals at the device or app-store level. These were the company’s earlier descriptions of its compliance work and policy preferences. They were not a response to the newly reported class action, and they do not establish the merits of the plaintiffs’ claims.

The next substantive legal developments will be court orders and any publicly available positions from the parties. For now, readers should keep three things separate: what the claim alleges, what Australia’s account rules require, and what Meta says it has done to comply. Combining them into a verdict would misrepresent the status of the case.

Sources: Reuters: Australian lawsuit · eSafety: age restrictions · Meta’s August compliance statement