The High Court of Lagos State, sitting in the Ikorodu Judicial Division, has awarded the sum of ₦500,000 in costs against Facebook Nigeria Operations Limited, describing the company as “a mere busy meddlesome interloper” after it attempted to intervene in a fundamental human rights suit filed against its parent company, Meta Platforms Inc., by Nigerian users of Facebook and Instagram.
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/2026-Summer-IDRI-Masterclass.jpg")
In a bench ruling delivered on Tuesday by Justice A.F. Pokanu, the court held that Facebook Nigeria’s motion seeking to set aside service of the originating processes was “strange and unwarranted,” finding that the company was not a party to the suit, was not served with the originating processes, and had no business filing applications in proceedings that did not concern it.
The ruling clears the path for the substantive suit — which alleges violations of the privacy rights of Nigerian users of Facebook and Instagram to proceed against the named respondent, Meta Platforms Inc.
The case, filed under Suit No. IKD/21116MFHR/2026, was brought by the Incorporated Trustees of Laws and Rights Awareness Initiative, suing on behalf of their Nigerian members who use Facebook and Instagram accounts, alongside five individual applicants: Deborah Esther Orji, Abayomi Olakunle Adebayo, Olamijulo Ayomide Ogunkilede, Kitan Bankole, and Abiola Owoaje.
The suit was filed against Meta Platforms Inc. the American parent company of Facebook and Instagram as the sole respondent. The case raises fundamental human rights questions about the privacy of Nigerian users on Meta’s platforms.
Despite not being named as a party in the suit, Facebook Nigeria Operations Limited — Meta’s Nigerian subsidiary filed a Motion on Notice dated March 5, 2026, seeking to set aside service of the originating processes.
When the matter came up for hearing on Tuesday, Facebook Nigeria’s counsel, Mrs. Mobisola Odimegwu, sought to withdraw the application.
However, counsel for the applicants/respondents, Olumide Babalola Esq., opposed the withdrawal and prayed for costs of ₦1,000,000, arguing that his clients had been forced to expend time and resources responding to an application that should never have been filed.
Justice Pokanu carefully examined the application and the circumstances surrounding it before delivering the ruling.
The judge acknowledged that while it was within the right of Facebook Nigeria to withdraw its application, the applicants/respondents had legitimate grounds to seek costs, having been compelled to file a Counter-Affidavit and Written Address dated March 10, 2026, in opposition to the motion, which was scheduled for hearing that morning.
On the substance of Facebook Nigeria’s application, Justice Pokanu was emphatic that there was no basis for the intervention in the first place.
“In my humble view, I do not see any ground that warranted the filing of the instant application to set aside service of the Originating Processes as there is no proof that the Applicant was served the originating processes,” the judge stated.
Justice Pokanu referred specifically to the Affidavit of Service at pages 146 and 147 of the case file, which clearly showed that the party served as the respondent was the named respondent Meta Platforms Inc. not Facebook Nigeria Operations Limited.
Having established that Facebook Nigeria was neither a party to the suit nor served with the originating processes, Justice Pokanu delivered a withering assessment of the company’s intervention.
“Consequently, I find that the instant application by Facebook Nigeria Operations Limited is strange and unwarranted. At best Facebook Nigeria Operations Limited is a mere busy meddlesome interloper in this suit,” Justice Pokanu declared.
The court awarded ₦500,000 in costs against Facebook Nigeria Operations Limited in favour of the applicants/respondents — half the ₦1,000,000 originally sought by the applicants’ counsel but a significant sum that sends a clear message about the consequences of uninvited intervention in legal proceedings.
The ruling carries important legal implications on several fronts.
First, it establishes a clear judicial distinction between Meta Platforms Inc. the global parent company headquartered in the United States and Facebook Nigeria Operations Limited, its Nigerian subsidiary. The court’s finding that the suit was properly filed against Meta Platforms Inc. and that Facebook Nigeria has no standing to intervene suggests that Nigerian courts are willing to pierce corporate structures to reach the parent company in cases involving the rights of Nigerian users.
Second, the “meddlesome interloper” characterisation effectively bars Facebook Nigeria from further participation in the proceedings unless it is formally joined as a party — a step that would require a separate application and the court’s leave.
Third, the ruling clears the path for the substantive fundamental human rights suit to proceed against Meta Platforms Inc., which will need to defend the case on its merits rather than through procedural interventions by its Nigerian subsidiary.
The case is part of a growing trend of litigation by Nigerian users and civil society organisations challenging the data practices and privacy policies of global technology companies operating in Nigeria.
Meta Platforms Inc., which operates Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp — all of which have massive user bases in Nigeria — has faced increasing regulatory and legal scrutiny over its handling of user data, content moderation policies, and the impact of its platforms on Nigerian society.
The suit’s allegation of privacy violations on behalf of Nigerian Facebook and Instagram users could, if successful, establish important precedents for the rights of Nigerian users on global technology platforms and the obligations of international technology companies toward their Nigerian user base.
Olumide Babalola Esq. appeared for the applicants/respondents. Lukwagh Mgbanyi with Esere Gbegbaje appeared for the respondent, Meta Platforms Inc. Mrs. Mobisola Odimegwu appeared for Facebook Nigeria Operations Limited.
The substantive suit is expected to proceed to hearing following the disposal of the interlocutory application.
[A MUST HAVE] Evidence Act Demystified With Recent And Contemporary Cases And Materials
Available now for NGN 40,000 at ASC Publications, 10, Boyle Street, Onikan, Lagos. Beside High Court, TBS. Email publications@ayindesanni.com or WhatsApp +2347056667384. Purchase Link: https://paystack.com/buy/evidence-act-complete-annotation
______________________________________________________________________ “Enhance Legal Practice With Authoritative Reports” — Alexander Payne Offers Comprehensive Law Reports, Spanning Over A Century Of Nigerian Jurisprudence
Interested buyers are encouraged to place their orders and enquiries via:
0704 444 4777, 0704 444 4999, 0818 199 9888
Website: www.alexandernigeria.com
The book also examines Nigeria's legal ecosystem, focusing on the LPELR and NBA AI Guidelines. As a bonus, every purchase comes with a FREE eBook titled: How to Use the AI Features in LegalPedia and LawPavilion.
Ohio Books Ltd praises the publication, stating:
"....this is the only Nigerian book I know of on the topic."
How to Order:
📞 Call, Text, or WhatsApp: 08034917063 | 07055285878
📧 Email: benadigwe1@gmail.com
🌎 Website: www.benadigwe.com
Ebook Version: Access it directly online at https://selar.com/prv626
Authored by Ben Ijeoma Adigwe Esq., ACIarb (UK), LL.M, Dip. in Artificial Intelligence, Director at the Delta State Ministry of Justice, Asaba, Nigeria.
______________________________________________________________________
