Douez v. Facebook: Can a Website Make You Sue in California?

Douez v. Facebook, Inc., 2017 SCC 33, dealt with forum selection clauses: terms in online contracts that say where disputes must be heard.

What happened

Deborah Douez, a B.C. resident, started a class action claiming Facebook used users' names and pictures in "Sponsored Stories" ads without consent, contrary to B.C.'s Privacy Act. Facebook's terms said all disputes had to be heard in California.

What the court decided

A majority of the Supreme Court held that there was strong cause not to enforce the clause, pointing to:

• the inequality of bargaining power between Facebook and an individual consumer;
• the online, take-it-or-leave-it nature of the contract;
• the importance of the privacy rights at stake, which B.C.'s law wanted local courts to decide.

Why it matters

Consumers in Canada may be able to bring claims in Canadian courts, even if the terms they clicked through say otherwise.

The Ontario angle

Ontario's Consumer Protection Act generally protects a consumer's right to go to court, and limits terms that would force consumers into arbitration or prevent class actions.

What it means for you

Don't assume a clause naming a foreign court ends your options. Get advice early.

Sources

• Douez v. Facebook, Inc., 2017 SCC 33 (CanLII)
• Consumer Protection Act, 2002

Read next: Garland v. Consumers' Gas: Getting Back Money You Shouldn't Have Paid

General Ontario legal information, not legal advice for your matter, and reading it does not create a retainer. Sources checked 15 October 2026: check the current law, forms and dates before you act.

Photos from Pexels: Shopping online with a tablet and a card · A laptop showing a cybersecurity message.

This article is general information for people in Ontario, not legal advice. Rules, forms and deadlines change, and every situation is different. Check the current rule or speak to a licensed legal professional before you act.