Neinstein LLP: Meta, Snapchat, TikTok Ontario Lawsuit Survives Dismissal

• Neinstein LLP is suing Meta, Snapchat, and TikTok on behalf of Ontario school boards, alleging negligence and public nuisance.
• The defendants' Rule 21 motion to dismiss the case was successfully resisted at the Superior Court in March 2025, with Justice Janet Leiper finding the claims arguable.
• The lawsuit will proceed to a two-day appeal hearing at the Divisional Court at the end of October.
• Similar US cases have resulted in significant settlements and judgments, including a $17 billion settlement with Meta that mandated design changes.
• Meta has stated that the safeguards agreed upon in the US settlement will not apply in Canada, highlighting the importance of the ongoing Ontario litigation.

Justice Janet Leiper explicitly stated that it is 'arguable that an addictive product that interferes with the mental health and educational aspirations of students is a public nuisance that requires a remedy,' providing a crucial judicial endorsement for the legal theory underpinning the Neinstein Meta Snapchat TikTok Ontario lawsuit.

Neinstein LLP, a prominent Canadian law firm, has initiated a significant legal challenge against major social media platforms Meta, Snapchat, and TikTok on behalf of several Ontario school boards. Filed in early 2024, the lawsuit alleges that these tech giants are liable for both negligence, including negligent product design, and public nuisance due to the impact of their platforms on students. This action represents a notable development in Canadian mass torts, aiming to hold social media companies accountable for their products' effects.

The defendants, Meta, Snapchat, and TikTok, attempted to dismiss the claim in February 2025 by filing a Rule 21 motion. They argued that the plaintiffs had failed to disclose a viable cause of action, seeking to prevent the case from proceeding. However, the legal team from Neinstein LLP, led by Michael Wolkowicz, successfully resisted this motion at the Superior Court. This initial victory allows the Ontario social media public nuisance claim to advance, setting the stage for further legal battles.

Justice Janet Leiper, in her March 2025 decision, underscored the potential validity of the school boards' arguments. She observed that if the presented statistics regarding social media's methods and outcomes on the learning environment are accurate, they reveal widespread effects impacting not only students' immediate access to education but also their long-term futures. Justice Leiper explicitly stated that it is 'arguable that an addictive product that interferes with the mental health and educational aspirations of students is a public nuisance that requires a remedy,' providing a crucial judicial endorsement for the legal theory underpinning the Neinstein Meta Snapchat TikTok Ontario lawsuit. The next critical stage for this case is a two-day hearing before a three-judge panel at the Divisional Court, scheduled for the end of October, where the defendants' appeal will be heard.

The Superior Court's decision to allow the Ontario social media public nuisance claim to proceed is a pivotal moment for social media accountability Ontario. Justice Leiper's ruling, which recognized the arguable nature of an addictive product causing public nuisance, provides a strong foundation for the school boards' case. This outcome suggests that Canadian courts are open to considering novel applications of established tort law principles to address the societal impacts of digital platforms, particularly concerning the well-being and educational attainment of young people. The successful resistance of the Rule 21 motion tech giants Ontario filed indicates a willingness to scrutinize the potential harms caused by these platforms.

This Canadian legal action aligns with a growing trend of litigation against tech companies in the United States, which offers potential insights into the viability of such claims. For instance, the Breathitt County school board in Kentucky secured a $27 million settlement just before trial in a similar case. In another significant development, the KGM case marked the first personal injury trial in this domain, where the plaintiff was awarded $6 million by a jury against Meta and YouTube, following pre-trial settlements with Snap and TikTok. These outcomes demonstrate that US courts and juries have accepted the premise of liability for social media's impact.

Further illustrating this trend, the Attorney General of New Mexico pursued a public nuisance claim against Meta, which resulted in damages totaling $567 million. Most recently, Meta reached a substantial settlement of approximately $17 billion with 29 state Attorneys General in multi-district litigation originating from a California federal court. This comprehensive settlement included significant injunctive relief, mandating design changes such as improved age verification, the disabling of notifications between midnight and 6 a.m. and during school hours, and restrictions on content promoting self-harm and cyberbullying. These US precedents, particularly the substantial financial penalties and mandated design changes, offer a compelling framework for how the Neinstein LLP mass torts Canada case might be viewed and adjudicated.

The implications of the US settlements, particularly the injunctive relief requiring design changes, are acutely relevant to the ongoing Neinstein Meta Snapchat TikTok Ontario lawsuit. While Michael Wolkowicz, Head of Mass Torts at Neinstein LLP, acknowledges the meaningfulness of these safeguards, he expressed shock at Meta's subsequent announcement that these specific protections would not be applied in Canada. This decision by Meta underscores the critical importance of the Canadian litigation in compelling similar modifications domestically and advancing social media accountability Ontario.

Wolkowicz views social media as 'the biggest social issue of our time,' drawing parallels to historical mass tort cases involving tobacco and asbestos, where litigation served as a primary catalyst for change. He emphasizes that while the US cases provide a 'path forward' demonstrating judicial and jury acceptance of these claims, the fight for accountability is far from over in Canada. The upcoming Divisional Court social media appeal will be crucial in determining the trajectory of this and similar future cases, as it will either affirm or challenge the Superior Court's initial ruling.

The legal team at Neinstein LLP recognizes that the common law itself, with some principles dating back 200 years, presents a unique challenge in addressing the complexities of modern digital platforms. Nevertheless, the firm remains committed to moving these actions forward, believing that litigation is essential to 'shine a light on this issue' and drive necessary reforms. The outcome of this Neinstein Meta Snapchat TikTok Ontario lawsuit could establish a significant precedent for Canadian mass torts, influencing how tech companies are held responsible for the public health and educational impacts of their products across the country.

This case represents a significant development in Canadian mass torts, establishing a potential precedent for holding social media companies liable for public nuisance and negligence in Ontario. Lawyers should closely monitor the upcoming Divisional Court appeal, as its outcome will critically inform the viability of similar claims against tech platforms and influence future litigation strategies regarding social media's impact on public health and education.

Source: Original reporting via Canadian Lawyer.