LHR Case Study: Business Instagram Account Blocked – Meta Stays Silent, Frankfurt Court Rules

Illustration: smartphone as a shop front with its shutter down and a padlock, shopping bags in front, next to the headline “Shop closed. Meta is silent.”A third suspension, no reasons given and nothing but silence towards the court as well: for a trader whose entire business runs through Instagram, the account was shop window, till and customer file all at once.

The Regional Court of Frankfurt am Main has now prohibited Meta from keeping the account blocked. Why does it help the company so little simply to say nothing?

By order of 9 November 2026 (case no. 2-06 O 388/26), the Regional Court of Frankfurt am Main (Landgericht Frankfurt am Main) issued a preliminary injunction prohibiting Meta Platforms Ireland Limited from deactivating our client’s business Instagram account and from deleting the content, follower data and message data stored in it. Each infringement is subject to an administrative fine of up to EUR 250,000, and Meta bears the costs of the proceedings. Eleven days passed between the receipt of our application and the order; there was no oral hearing.

Business Instagram account blocked: a shop without premises

Our client trades in branded goods and sells them from Germany. She has neither an online shop nor physical premises; offers, advice and orders all run through Instagram stories and direct messages, and the account accounts for by far the largest part of her turnover.

It was not the first suspension, and each one had cost her customers. In September 2026, Meta deactivated the business account again. The notices in the app referred to individual stories showing goods, and for precisely those goods our client was able to produce the purchase invoices. Nobody asked for them, however.

In the weeks that followed, she appealed in the app and turned to out-of-court dispute settlement bodies. One of them considered itself not competent, and the other submissions had not changed anything about the suspension by the time the court ruled. Meta left our demand to restore the account unanswered until the deadline of 20 October 2026, and on 29 October 2026 the application for a preliminary injunction was filed with the Regional Court of Frankfurt am Main.

Why does silence in court not help Meta?

The chamber gave Meta until 6 November 2026 to comment on the application. Meta did not respond, so the court decided solely on the basis of our submissions and our client’s affidavit. A platform that gives no reasons for a suspension, neither in the app nor to the lawyer nor to the court, cannot expect the judge to come up with a good reason on its behalf.

In this situation, courts assume that the suspension was without cause. The Regional Court of Mainz said so expressly only a few days ago in proceedings we conducted concerning a Facebook account with a business page (in German), and the 6th Civil Chamber in Frankfurt had previously prohibited Meta from blocking an account for alleged “account integrity” issues (in German) and from deactivating a journalist’s channel once again (in German).

For traders who show branded goods in their stories in particular, mere suspicion apparently suffices for Meta’s systems. Nobody wants to see the invoice that would dispel that suspicion beforehand, of course, and the platform offers practically no procedure in which it could be presented.

Contract, competition law and a German forum

The Regional Court of Frankfurt am Main based the claim on the terms-of-use contract and on competition law. The contract gives rise to duties of consideration under Section 241(2) of the German Civil Code (BGB), and since 2021 the Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof) has required a platform to inform users before a suspension, to state the reason and to give them an opportunity to respond (judgments of 29 July 2021, case nos. III ZR 179/20 and III ZR 192/20). The Digital Services Act requires a clear and specific statement of reasons for every suspension (Art. 17 DSA), and there was nothing of the kind here.

Under competition law, Section 33(1) of the German Act against Restraints of Competition (GWB) entitles anyone affected by an unfair impediment by a company with market power to demand that it cease (Section 19 GWB, Section 20(1) GWB). In proceedings likewise conducted by us (in German), the Higher Regional Court of Frankfurt am Main (Oberlandesgericht Frankfurt am Main) explained when an Instagram user depends on Meta, namely when the suspension cuts the connection to their followers and they cannot even inform them of a move to another platform (order of 14 July 2026, case no. 11 W 12/26 (Kart)). For a trader whose customers know her only through Instagram and order there, that is obvious.

That a German court decides although Meta is based in Dublin follows from Art. 7(2) of the Brussels Ia Regulation, because an abuse under competition law is a tort. Anyone who also supplies customers abroad, however, needs a documented link between the business and Germany, and the application should back this up with evidence.

What traders with a blocked Instagram account should do

The proceedings were not decided by any particular trick but by an application that left the court nothing to clarify. A few points can be taken from the case:

The injunction only takes effect once it has been formally served on Meta in Ireland, and service must be initiated within one month of the order (Section 929(2) of the German Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO)). We have arranged service and sent Meta the order in parallel for information. The order is not final, and Meta may file an objection; whether the company will then say anything for the first time in these proceedings remains to be seen.

Frequently asked questions about a blocked business Instagram account

What can I do if my business Instagram account has been blocked?+
First save all notices from Meta as screenshots and appeal in the app. If that fails, a lawyer’s letter with a short deadline follows. If Meta does not respond to that either, a preliminary injunction based on the terms-of-use contract and competition law may be an option.
Do I have to go to a dispute settlement body before going to court?+
No. Turning to a certified body under Art. 21 DSA is voluntary, its decision does not bind the platform and it does not preclude going to court. As the urgency period for interim proceedings keeps running, it is advisable to pursue both routes in parallel.
Can I take action against Meta in Germany if my customers are abroad?+
In many cases, yes. What matters is whether the suspension has an effect on the German market, for example because the trader operates from Germany, purchases or ships goods here or supplies customers in Germany. The trader should be able to document this link with invoices, shipping receipts and the business registration.
What happens if Meta does not respond to the application?+
The court then decides on the basis of the application and the facts made credible. If Meta does not give the court any specific reason for the suspension either, courts regularly assume that it was without cause. This does, however, require the application itself to be complete and documented.
When does Meta have to restore the account after a preliminary injunction?+
An order issued without an oral hearing only takes effect once it has been served on Meta. As Meta is based in Ireland, service abroad is required, which can take from a few days to a few weeks. Sending the order informally in addition gives Meta the opportunity to react earlier.

Your business runs on Instagram and the account has been blocked?

Send us the suspension notice, a few key facts about your account and a rough indication of your turnover. We will assess whether a preliminary injunction against Meta is an option and which evidence you need. You will usually receive an initial assessment within 24 hours.

Contact us now

Further information

Exit mobile version