Obligation for social networks to delete hate accounts – Significant decision by the Frankfurt Higher Regional Court
In its judgment of 30.06.2025 (Case No.: 16 U 5/24, not yet final), the Frankfurt Higher Regional Court has issued a decision of practical relevance for social networks. The judges affirmed, under certain conditions, the obligation of an operator to completely remove abusive user accounts, not merely to delete individual flagged posts.
Facts of the case: Confrontation with extensive violations of personality rights
In the underlying case, the plaintiff was the target of repeated and severe insults, humiliations, and defamations via the Facebook platform. The comments were published by a single user, whose profile had been specifically created to degrade and attack the plaintiff. Despite complaints by the aggrieved party, the network operator initially removed only the relevant posts. The offending user profile—a so-called ‘hate account’—remained online.
The plaintiff subsequently demanded that the entire user account be fully deleted. She argued that merely removing the abusive posts did not adequately protect her rights, since the account was created solely for the purpose of violating her personal rights.
Key legal considerations of the Higher Regional Court
The Frankfurt Higher Regional Court found that a situational assessment was necessary. The mere deletion of individual content may not suffice in cases where the user profile is operated almost exclusively for the purpose of demeaning and insulting others. In such situations, the affected person’s right of personality is so gravely and continually violated that the platform operator may be subject to further-reaching obligations.
Balancing constitutionally protected positions
The court also placed the constitutionally required balancing of freedom of communication and protection of personal rights at the forefront. While operators of social networks are generally obliged to respect the principle of proportionality when interfering with freedom of expression and informational self-determination, this principle takes a back seat when the flagged profile operates solely to harm and defame third parties. In such cases, the interest in effective protection against persistent violations of personality rights prevails.
The decision highlights that a platform operator may be legally obliged to permanently terminate access to an account if its use is directed solely at unlawful attacks and not at any other communication interests.
Technical and practical means of control as a benchmark
The court additionally emphasized that the obligation to delete an account must remain within the operator’s technical and actual control capacities. In particular, the identification of such hate accounts is possible when the account’s behavior presents an overall degrading and insulting pattern which cannot be remedied by deleting individual posts.
Implications for platform operators and affected parties
With this judgment, the Frankfurt Higher Regional Court makes it clear that the responsibility for protecting personal rights on digital platforms does not end with the simple deletion of individual posts. Operators must assess in each specific case whether individual accounts are being used as instruments for repeated legal violations and, if necessary, consider their complete deactivation.
Relevance for companies and individuals
The judgment affects not only those targeted by so-called hate accounts, but also companies, influencers, and public figures who may regularly fall victim to such attacks. Especially in the context of business-related reviews and statements on platforms like Facebook, the case law may introduce a new dimension of platform liability and duty of prevention.
Guidance on legal certainty and procedural situation
It should be noted that decisions such as this one are essentially case-specific and may be influenced by further developments in the case law of lower courts as well as by European legal requirements—such as the amendment of the Digital Services Act (DSA). The proceedings concerned a specific dispute; final clarity, especially regarding the scope of review and deletion obligations for major platforms, is likely to be established only through further instances.
Source reference
The judgment of the Frankfurt Higher Regional Court (Case No.: 16 U 5/24) of 30.06.2025 is documented at urteile.news: <a href="https://urteile.news/OLG-Frankfurt-am-Main16-U-5824Im-Einzelfall-muss-Facebook-beleidigende-Nutzerprofile-sog-Hass-Accounts-komplett-loeschen-und-nicht-nur-die-beleidigenden-Posts~N35175″>https://urteile.news/OLG-Frankfurt-am-Main16-U-5824Im-Einzelfall-muss-Facebook-beleidigende-Nutzerprofile-sog-Hass-Accounts-komplett-loeschen-und-nicht-nur-die-beleidigenden-Posts~N35175.
Subtle transition
Especially when it comes to asserting or defending claims in connection with violations of personality rights on social networks, clarification of legal frameworks and options can be of considerable importance. For an individual assessment of such matters, the Rechtsanwalt of MTR Legal are at your disposal.
