This is a short sampling of lawsuits on wireless and health. There are many more than are on this page but they provide examples of the worldwide legal action moving forward.

If you have legal action for us to share, please email [email protected] with the press release and details.

United States

Environmental Health Trust et al., versus the Federal Communications Commission

  • EHT et al., v the FCC is a historic case regarding the FCC’s 25-year-old exposure guidelines for radio-frequency radiation (RFR) from cell phones, cell towers, Wi-Fi, 5G and other wireless communication devices. The 14 petitioners in the case claim the FCC violated several federal laws when the FCC decided (in 2019) not to update their 1996 wireless radiation limits after a 7 year inquiry and thousands of pages of research on the FCC record showing harmful effects from wireless radiofrequency radiation. 

Lake Tahoe Case 

Elk Grove Unified School District Case

USA Thirteen Consolidated Brain Cancer (litigation filed in 2001 and currently winding their way through US court 

  • “Ashcraft & Gerel LLP ,Morganroth & Morganroth PLLC, Lundy Lundy, and Soileau & South L.L.P. are representing 13 cases alleging cell phone radiation led to brain cancer. There are 46 defendants including Motorola, Nokia, AT&T, Bell Atlantic, Cellular One, Cingular Wireless, SBC Communications, Verizon, Vodafone, the Telecommunications Industry Association, the IEEE, ANSI, the CTIA, and the FCC”.
  • 2016 Consolidated Brain Cancer update: Appeals court decided that a different legal standard for evidence should have been applied.
  • 2016 Wall Street Journal Article – “Lawsuit Over Cellphones and Cancer Hits a Stumbling Block”
  • This case is ongoing. 


Attorney Ray Broomhall in Australia is using a successful legal strategy regarding cell towers and small cells. 

“Private criminal prosecutions can also be auctioned against emitters, Councillors etc if they ignore your letter under various criminal offense provisions. Corporations are not exempt from criminal prosecution. There are many other options  I have used successfully also. Quite frankly I have been very strategic in the way I have been applying the law throughout Australia to get to this point. I was the lawyer behind Dundas Street in Coogee in Ranwicks 5G war with TPG, I also had 30 others communities in Qld, Vic and NSW also fighting TPG.  They pulled out. I was the lawyer behind Wilson’s Creeks fight with Telstra, we won both of these fights in using the precautionary principle, forcing Councils to either reject development or to issue abatement notices to stop emitting after development had been approved.”

United Kingdom 

2018: UK Lawsuit against NOKIA

Action Against 5G with barrister Michael Mansfield

  • Action Against 5G’s  lawsuit seeks to prevent the ongoing expansion of 5G networks in the UK. The group is securing the services of Michael Mansfield, a barrister who has handled several high-profile legal cases that garnered national attention in the past. Read more act

Jessica Learmond-Criqui 

  • (2020) Lawyers in the UK led by solicitor Jessica Learmond-Criqui are taking the UK government to court over health concerns relating to 5G and to EMFs generally. Stay updated on the case here. What is this legal action trying to achieve?
  • to obtain a change of government policy to stop the harm to UK residents, which would include:
    • an immediate halt to the roll out of 5G infrastructure until it is proven to be safe;
    • Direct all such businesses and persons to turn off all equipment which propagate wireless 5G signals including without limitation masts, antennae, wifi (including in schools), small cells;
    • Direct all products which use 5G wireless technology to be recalled as they are not safe;
    • Direct that the manufacture of all products using 5G wireless technology be halted.
  • Require the government to ensure that the industry lays cabling for the purposes of upgrades in technology rather than relying on wireless technology generating RFR and EMFs;
  • Require the government to examine all equipment and gadgets generating RFR and to take steps to ensure that such equipment does not cause harm to humans.

A summary of much of the legal press around this case:

  • David Wolfe discussed why judicial reviews are so essential to our legal system in The Times.
  • Jessica Learmond-Criqui outlined the process of persuading the courts to recognise a new illness in Litigation Futures.
  • David Wolfe explained what local governments need to know about consultation responses in Local Government Lawyer.
  • In New Law Journal, Jessica Learmond-Criqui examined the government’s decision-making process in relation to the 5G networks. She noted that, shockingly, the ministers making the decision about the 5G rollout were not shown the evidence (collected through a public consultation in 2019) that 5G can negatively impact our health. The piece first published in December and then again in the February edition.
  • Jessica Learmond-Criqui and Phillip Watts provided a consumer piece explaining to parents how the 5G rollout could impact our health in Toddle About.
  • Jessica Learmond-Criqui used the 5G Judicial Review to outline how to get a new disability recognised in the law in Solicitors Journal.
  • Jessica Learmond-Criqui’s involvement in challenging the government over its 5G strategy was summarised in Edward Fennell’s Legal Diary.


Lawsuit against Microsoft and Huawei 



2019: 4th Case in Italy where a worker is compensated for tumors linked to cell phone radiation.  In January 2019, a Court in Monza recognized an occupational disease in a former airport employee, who developed acoustic neuroma and was left permanently incapacitated.

  • Read BC Legal  “Italian Workers’ Compensation Authority (INAIL) Ordered to Pay Out to 4th Mobile Phone User with Cancer” “Throughout his 10-year employment period, he alleged more than 4 hours (sessions of up to 45 minutes consecutively) of daily use of a Siemens DECT phone, a Nokia and later a Samsung mobile. The CTU, a collaboration of experts and technical advisers assigned to evaluate the case, concluded that the development of the claimant’s left auditory nerve neuroma was related to his work, harking back to the Hardell study.”

2017: The Italian Court of Ivrea ruling recognizes causal link between cellphone use and brain tumor. Italian court recognized a causal link in an April 11, 2017 ruling which awarded a Telecom employee, Roberto Romeo, lifetime damages of 500 euros a month after he developed a brain tumor from fifteen years of cellphone use.

2012 Italian Supreme Court Ruling: Man’s brain tumor was caused by his cell phone use. 

The National Institute for Workmen’s Compensation must compensate a worker with head tumor due to cell use. Innocente Marcolini, a 60-year-old retired businessman argued that the excessive use of his mobile phone for around six hours every day for 12 years caused a benign brain tumor that left his face partially paralyzed.



In India, there are cases pending in the Supreme Court but hearings have not been set.

Simarjeet Singh v. State of Punjab and others: A case involving cell antennas where a March 2, 2021 ruling resulted in towers being removed “This order is being passed in view of the fact that installation of towers in a haphazard manner may endanger lives and property of the people and would violate their rights under Article 21 of the Constitution.”

Share Source: Environmental Health Trust