Meta Platforms is challenging a Nigerian court ruling that could change how Facebook and Instagram use people's personal data to deliver targeted advertisements.

The case centres on a question millions of Nigerians may never have thought about when opening a social media account: Should accepting a platform's terms and conditions automatically mean agreeing to have your online behaviour tracked for advertising?

On September 25, 2026, the Lagos High Court ruled that Meta's processing and profiling of the applicants' personal data for behavioural advertising was unlawful. Five days later, on September 30, Meta filed an appeal, according to BusinessDay.

The dispute could have implications beyond Meta. It raises broader questions about privacy, informed consent and the power technology companies have over the data people share when using free online services.

What did the court decide?

The case was brought by the Incorporated Trustees of Laws and Rights Awareness Initiative and five individual applicants, who argued that Meta used and profiled their personal information for targeted advertising without valid consent.

The Lagos High Court reportedly found that the processing at issue violated privacy protections under Section 37 of Nigeria's Constitution and the Nigeria Data Protection Act 2023. It ordered Meta to stop the unlawful processing, take corrective steps and submit an affidavit of compliance within eight weeks. The court also awarded the applicants the naira equivalent of $100,000 in general damages, plus ₦1 million in legal costs.

At the centre of the dispute is Meta's argument that Facebook and Instagram are free services funded by advertising, and that users accept the company's terms when they register.

The court reportedly rejected the idea that this arrangement automatically makes behavioural advertising necessary to provide social networking services. In other words, accepting general terms does not necessarily establish valid consent for every way a company might use someone's personal data.

Why is Meta appealing?

Targeted advertising is central to Meta's business model. By analysing activity and inferred interests, platforms can show advertisements they believe users are more likely to engage with.

Meta's appeal puts the legal basis for that processing under scrutiny. The Court of Appeal will need to consider the relevant privacy law, consent requirements and the arguments raised by the parties.

For Meta, the outcome could affect how it obtains permission to use Nigerian users' data for personalised advertising. For users, it raises a question about whether they should have more meaningful control over that data without being forced to accept broad tracking terms to use a social platform.

The appeal does not mean Meta has won or that the Lagos ruling has been overturned. The outcome remains unresolved, and the available reports do not establish whether a stay of the High Court's orders has been granted.

What does this mean for Nigerians using Facebook and Instagram?

For now, users should not assume that every advertisement will immediately change or that all targeted advertising has been banned in Nigeria.

The ruling concerns the legality of the data processing challenged in the case. Its wider practical effect will depend on the court orders, their implementation and the outcome of the appeal.

Still, the case highlights an important distinction: using a free platform does not automatically answer every question about how personal data should be collected, analysed and used.

Nigeria has already seen wider scrutiny of Meta's data practices. In 2024, the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission imposed a $220 million penalty on Meta and WhatsApp over consumer-protection, competition and data-related violations. That was a separate regulatory proceeding from the current Lagos court case.

The bigger picture

Meta's appeal is about more than one company or one set of advertisements. It is part of a broader debate over who gets to decide how personal information is used in an increasingly data-driven economy.

For digital platforms, advertising helps fund services that billions of people use without paying a subscription. For users, that model raises questions about transparency, consent and the choices available when personal information becomes part of the business model.

The challenge for regulators and courts is to determine where the law draws the line between legitimate data processing and practices that undermine users' privacy rights.

For Nigeria's technology sector, the outcome could help clarify what companies must do to obtain meaningful consent and how they can balance commercial interests with data protection.

The key question is whether access to a free social media service should require users to accept behavioural advertising — or whether they should have a meaningful choice.

Meta's appeal means that question is still being contested.