Corporate legislation usually protects directors from personal liability, although there are some exceptions.

The CEO of Meta claims that he cannot be personally held responsible for accusations that his platforms have led to children's addiction to social media.

Zuckerberg's legal team was in court in Oakland, California this week regarding a series of lawsuits filed against Meta by several parents.

The adults who sued Zuckerberg claim that his actions and those of Meta have harmed children by causing "social media addiction", as reported by NBC Bay Area and Insider.

Zuckerberg has requested that he personally be removed from the lawsuits. A ruling in favor of the billionaire would exempt him from personal liability, but would not dismiss the lawsuits against Meta.

The lawsuits claim that Zuckerberg's actions and inaction have led to social media addiction and accuse him of ignoring warnings that Facebook and Instagram are not safe for children.

In court documents seen by Business Insider, Zuckerberg's lawyers stated: "It is a fundamental principle that individuals cannot be held personally responsible for the acts or omissions of a corporation solely based on their status as directors, officers or shareholders of the company".

His lawyers reiterated their arguments in court on February 22, stating that there is a clear distinction between what Zuckerberg, as an individual, is personally responsible for and his role as CEO, as reported by NBC Bay Area.

In corporate law, directors are usually protected from personal liability, according to Bloomberg.

The "corporate veil", which generally refers to the distinctions between a business and its owners, protects directors in most circumstances, although there are some exceptions, according to a law firm article by Oberheiden P.C.

Some situations where directors may face liability include criminal acts and intentional or gross negligence. They may also be responsible in lawsuits brought by third parties against a CEO, Oberheiden P.C. wrote, stating: "In these lawsuits, claimants are not trying to hold CEOs responsible for corporate acts (or alleged corporate acts), but for acts undertaken by CEOs in their individual capacity".

Claimants argued in court that Zuckerberg had a duty to publicly share findings related to the risks of social media for children. Still, U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers appeared skeptical of this argument.

However, the judge suggested that if it is established that Meta had an obligation to disclose this information, then the CEO might be held accountable for concealing it.

"If Mark Zuckerberg knew the depth and breadth to which children were being affected daily by accessing and becoming addicted to the platforms his company oversees and failed to take significant and meaningful steps to remedy these harms, then he should be held personally accountable", said Titania Jordan from Bark Technologies, an online safety and parental control company, to NBC Bay Area.

If Zuckerberg is deemed personally responsible, it could have significant implications for other lawsuits against CEOs of social media giants.