Litigating in the age of social media – tips, tricks and traps
Helen Wang
Carey Olsen, Singapore
Joni Khoo
Carey Olsen, Singapore
Zhao Shuting
Carey Olsen, Singapore
Report on a Young Litigators seminar held at the Singapore office of Allen & Gledhill
9 April 2025
Co-chairs
Irene Arévalo González Gómez-Acebo & Pombo, Madrid
Akima Lambert Hogan Lovells International, London
Panellists
Julia Suzana Ferraz-Cardoso ENS, Sandton
Xian Fong Foo Rajah & Tann, Singapore
Felipe Galea BMA, São Paulo
David Jandrasits Schwärzler, Vaduz
Melissa Mak Allen & Gledhill, Singapore
The pervasive influence of social media has profoundly shaped modern life, and its significance is no longer confined to personal and social interactions. Understanding and managing the complexities social media introduces into the litigation process is now an essential skill for practitioners.
On 9 April 2025, the IBA Young Litigators Forum hosted a seminar titled ‘Litigating in the Age of Social Media – Tips, Tricks and Traps’ at the Singapore office of Allen & Gledhill.
The seminar featured a distinguished panel of litigators from various jurisdictions and sectors, each bringing their unique perspective on how to navigate the challenges social media presents.
The seminar opened with an introduction by Akima Lambert; with over 60 per cent of the world’s population using social media and the average daily usage being over two hours, litigators must not only be ready for, but should also learn to capitalise on the ubiquity of social media. Each speaker reflected on their experiences relating to the interplay between social media and litigation. The session was structured around four themes:
- Pre-action considerations
- Service of proceedings via social media
- Use of social media evidence in discovery
- Defamation on social media
Pre-action considerations
In the first segment, the panel discussed the issue of obtaining information and/or documents of a private social media account in the pre-action and investigations stage. The test for obtaining pre-action discovery and the relevance of ethical or confidentiality concerns may differ across jurisdictions.
Practically, it is important to determine who controls the platform, where the desired data is located, and to take a step back and assess the likely usefulness of the information and/or documents in circumstances where it is possible for defendants or fraudsters to hide their identity through fake IDs or VPNs.
Service via social media
The second segment weighed traditional methods of service of proceedings against the pros and cons of doing so via non-traditional methods such as social media, bearing in mind that the purpose of service is to ensure that proceedings are properly brought to the defendant’s attention and to uphold the fairness of the litigation process.
The panel and seminar participants had a lively discussion on the various mediums being increasingly accepted by the courts. Some jurisdictions such as India and Singapore have already endorsed service through means such as WhatsApp and even by ‘airdropping’ copies of court papers into the cryptocurrency wallet(s) of the defendant, whereas other jurisdictions such as Spain still adopt a more conservative approach to service.
Another key consideration to the question of service via non-traditional methods is whether it can be reliably proved that the owner of a social media account is indeed the defendant in question.
Discovery of social media content
The third segment explored the effective deployment of social media information in discovery and the boundaries of admissibility. Assuming the said social media information is relevant, discoverable and not a fishing expedition, privacy concerns can be managed through mechanisms such as sealed files or private hearings. Similarly, confidentiality concerns can be addressed through mutual agreement between parties.
On best practices for collecting and presenting social media evidence, the panel discussed the possibility of notarising key evidence to satisfy formality requirements, filing printed screenshots initially and submitting notarised copies if authenticity is challenged, and preserving metadata.
Defamation in the context of social media
In the final segment, the panel discussed practical considerations in deploying social media in litigation where there may be possible defamation claims. Given the nature of social media and possibility of deleting or editing content, defamatory content may be difficult to preserve. It should be documented immediately and carefully to avoid any potential challenge as to its accuracy and reliability: for example, by obtaining a notarised copy of the document as soon as possible.
More broadly, the panel also discussed the importance of selecting the jurisdiction in which proceedings are commenced (since penalties and remedies differ across jurisdictions) and identifying the correct defendant.
Interactive workshop
The session concluded with an interactive workshop. Participants were divided into groups and engaged in a hypothetical case study involving potentially defamatory statements made by an employee about a competitor. Each group then presented their arguments and engaged in a wider discussion.
Conclusion
This dynamic and engaging seminar provided young litigators with valuable practical insights into the evolving intersection of litigation and social media. Participants left better equipped to anticipate, manage and leverage the challenges and opportunities presented by social media in modern legal practice.