Billionaire Andrew Forrest scores win against Meta in scam ads case

A US Federal Court has ruled against Meta in an ongoing legal dispute with Australian billionaire Andrew Forrest, who is suing the social media giant over scam ads that feature his likeness without his permission. A judge ruled Meta had "spoliated" evidence, resulting in "prejudice against" Mr Forrest and imposed sanctions on the company. What's next: Mr Forrest has welcomed the ruling and said Meta "must not be allowed to outrun responsibility or the full weight of the law." A US Federal court has ruled that Meta failed to preserve key evidence in an ongoing legal battle with Andrew Forrest, an outcome the Australian billionaire said could help make sure the social media giant did not "outrun responsibility". Mr Forrest is suing Meta over scam ads on its platforms that use his likeness without permission. His legal team said the adverts, which show him endorsing fraudulent cryptocurrency and other investment products on Facebook, have "plagued" the mining magnate for years and duped thousands of victims. Meta has countered that the offending marketing messages were not its doing. The hearing also looked into whether Meta had wrongly ditched evidence, forfeiting its ability to take shelter behind the act. On Tuesday, the judge has found Meta had "spoliated evidence … resulting in prejudice to Forrest". Evidence not preserved The ruling also stated the company had failed to take reasonable steps to preserve electronically stored information that should have been kept in anticipation of litigation, including the final scam ads that were shown to victims. Under US law, spoliation is the intentional, reckless, or negligent withholding, hiding, altering, or destroying of evidence relevant to a legal proceeding. The ruling said in this case Meta should have foreseen the need to preserve any data relevant to the case. The ruling said if the jury found at trial that Meta acted with the intent to deprive Mr Forrest of the information, they should also assume the evidence in question was unfavourable to Meta. 'Clear message' Mr Forrest welcomed the ruling, saying: "We now have a glimmer of hope of correcting a huge injustice inflicted on society". "Meta's conduct in this litigation so far has been evasive, duplicitous and deeply revealing. It exposes a corporate culture that disregards proper and fair process with little restraint. "The Court's sanctions send a clear message. Meta cannot destroy or lose evidence and then use that missing evidence as a shield. The penalties for these wrongdoings must fall on Meta, not on the victims of scam advertising." The court said Mr Forrest was entitled to fees and costs incurred as of the ruling, and that he and Meta must meet to discuss how much should be awarded. Mr Forrest had previously launched criminal charges against Meta in 2022 in an Australian court, but they were discontinued in 2024. Since 2019, thousands of deceptive advertisements on Facebook have used the likeness of the highly prominent businessman to promote scams, racking up thousands of victims, according to the suit. The billionaire's legal team argues that Meta's artificial intelligence tools optimised and personalised fraudulent ads before distributing them, thereby making Meta an active participant, rather than a mere intermediary.