On 14 May 2026, the first European class action seeking an injunction was heard at the Milan Commercial Court against Meta (Facebook, Instagram) and TikTok. The case was brought by Moige (the Italian Parents’ Movement) in conjunction with the Turin-based law firm Ambrosio & Commodo and a group of families. The aim: to ensure effective protection for children in the digital world. .
Unlike a class action for damages, an injunction class action is a collective redress mechanism introduced in 2021 by Article 840-sexiesdecies of the Consumer Code. In practice, it serves to obtain a court order to stop an unfair practice, remove unfair terms, halt misleading advertising, cease unlawful data processing, and prevent conduct harmful to a community.
The class action brought by Moige is seeking three things:
- verification of actual age and compliance with the ban on children under 14;
- elimination of mechanisms that create addiction: algorithms, infinite scrolling and captology;
- the obligation to provide clear and transparent information on risks
The first point may be the quickest to achieve. Although both Italian law and European legislation prohibit registration by children under the age of 14, according to the association, “it is estimated that around 3.5 million children aged between 7 and 14 use Meta and TikTok platforms in breach of this ban”. The reason is that these platforms’ age verification systems are ineffective (one need only use a VPN to bypass them, for example, ed.), and the association is therefore calling for the adoption of “genuine, certified systems” designed to verify age. It is a request that is currently falling on very fertile ground: last April, in fact, the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, announced a new European app for age verification.
The second point of the class action, however, may only be achieved in the long term, and with a number of obstacles to overcome. Indeed, the removal of these mechanisms would directly undermine the business model of social media platforms. Facebook, Instagram and TikTok base a large part of their advertising revenue on engagement: the more time users spend on the platform, the more data is collected and the more advertising can be sold. Profiling algorithms, infinite scrolling, constant notifications and reward systems based on likes and personalised content are not mere accessories, but tools specifically designed to increase users’ time spent online and their behavioural addiction. Their effects have now been widely reported and studied. The effects of these systems are now the subject of studies, legal disputes and court rulings in various countries. Just last March, a US jury ordered Meta (Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp) and Google (YouTube) to pay three million dollars in compensation to a 20-year-old woman for anxiety and depression caused by social media addiction. We wrote about it here, interviewing psychiatrist Tonino Cantelmi.
The third point, however, seems more realistic, at least in the short term: requiring platforms to provide clear and transparent information on the risks and, as the association has stated, ensuring that “this information is made mandatory and accessible, following the model of the so-called pharmaceutical ‘package leaflet’, so as to provide families with practical tools for awareness and protection”.
During the hearing, as stated in the association’s press release, “lawyers for Meta and TikTok raised preliminary objections, challenging the competence and jurisdiction of the Italian courts to rule on their conduct”.
After all, calling for the removal of these mechanisms would mean directly interfering with the economic and technological architecture that generates the platforms’ revenue. Would it not be unlikely for a court to succeed in forcing Meta or TikTok to ‘switch off’ their engagement algorithms entirely? Would that not amount to virtually rewriting their business model?
We wanted to put these concerns and other questions directly to Antonino Polimeni, a solicitor specialising in internet law, privacy and copyright,
Perhaps it would be more realistic for the judge to impose targeted restrictions, particularly for minors? For example, limiting auto-suggestions, introducing mandatory breaks or ‘you’ve spent too much time online’ screens to curb endless scrolling, and banning night-time notifications for minors?
“Minors certainly need to be protected with particular care. However, the issue is broader than that: social media, as it is currently designed, can be harmful to everyone. When I speak of harm, I mean actual harm to health. It is unacceptable that a product which has a negative impact on people’s health should be allowed to circulate in Europe without adequate checks and without real limits. This principle applies to any product, whether digital or physical. A doll, for example, cannot be sold if an eye can come off and be swallowed by a child. The reasoning, in the digital world, should be the same. The rules are there.”
What are your thoughts on this case? What might be the implications and complications? Could the class action set a European precedent that might also influence the Digital Services Act and future EU regulations on social media?
“This is a very important case, because it brings before the courts an issue that has so far often been treated as an educational or family matter, whereas it also – and above all – concerns the platforms’ corporate liability. The rules are already in place. The Digital Services Act regulates liability, transparency, systemic risks and the protection of minors. The new Directive on liability for defective products, updated in 2024, extends this approach to software, updates, digital systems and artificial intelligence. Then there is the European General Product Safety Regulation, which also covers digital products. Furthermore, the future Digital Fairness Act is expected to address manipulative practices, dark patterns and mechanisms of digital addiction. This is precisely what this case is about. The key is to ensure these rules are applied to these products. The Court of Milan is among the most experienced in Italy on digital matters, and this gives us confidence. The complications, in my view, are procedural. They mainly concern proving the link between the platform’s design, the companies’ conduct and the harm suffered by users, particularly minors. If this liability were established, the class action could set a significant precedent for future European regulation of social media.”
The proceedings will continue with further hearings, the schedule for which the court will announce shortly. But regardless of the outcome of the case, one thing already seems clear: for the first time in Europe, it is not just social media content that is coming under scrutiny, but the very model by which platforms capture users’ attention, time and data. Even a partial victory for Moige could set an important precedent, increasing pressure on big tech and on the European debate regarding the protection of minors online, which is all too often confined to educational warnings and parental responsibility, rather than on restrictions for minors. (photo by Ludovic Toinel on Unsplash)
Update of 16 May 2026 by the editorial team
Meta, through its communications and public relations agency, has sent the following statement to our editorial team. It is signed by a spokesperson whom the company declined to name, even upon specific request, but who, according to the statement, is setting out the company’s position: “We know that parents are concerned about the safety of their teenage children online, and that is precisely why we continue to work to help them protect them. We strongly reject these allegations, which ignore our long-standing commitment to supporting young people. Teen Accounts offer built-in protections that limit who can contact teenagers, the content they can access, and the time they spend on Facebook and Instagram. We stand by our work and will continue to go the extra mile to protect young people and ensure their safety.”
The editorial team is already working to investigate the various aspects of the story in greater depth, including, of course, to gain a clearer understanding of Meta and TikTok’s positions.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ©
