Alleged Privacy Invasion: Court Rules In Falana’s Favour, Awards $25,000 As Damages Against Meta

Alleged Privacy Invasion - Court Rules in Falana’s Favour, Awards $25,000 Against Meta

In a landmark judgment delivered on January 13, 2026, the Lagos High Court at Tafawa Balewa Square awarded $25,000 in damages to renowned human rights lawyer Femi Falana (SAN) in his privacy invasion case against Meta Platforms Inc., the U.S.-based technology giant owned by Mark Zuckerberg.

Falana had filed a $5 million lawsuit against Meta, alleging that the company published motion images and voice captions on its platform under the name “AfriCare Health Centre,” falsely suggesting that he suffered from prostatitis. He argued that this amounted to an invasion of his privacy as guaranteed under Section 37 of the Nigerian Constitution and violated provisions of the Nigeria Data Protection Act (NDPA) 2023.

The false publication, according to Falana, tarnished his reputation, undermined the image he had built over decades, and caused him significant mental and emotional distress.

Justice Olalekan Oresanya, who presided over the case, ruled that Meta owed a duty of care to individuals affected by content disseminated on its platform, especially when such content is monetised. The court rejected Meta’s reliance on the “mere hosting” or “intermediary” defence, stressing that platforms that profit from content cannot absolve themselves of responsibility when harm from misinformation is foreseeable.

The judgment underscored that even public figures retain their right to privacy, particularly concerning sensitive health data.

The court found Meta vicariously liable for the offensive video, noting that the company determines the means and purposes of processing content, monetises pages, and controls distribution algorithms.

This effectively positioned Meta as a joint data controller with page owners. Consequently, the court held that Meta had breached Section 24 of the NDPA by processing inaccurate, harmful, and unlawful personal data without a legitimate basis.

The ruling emphasised that platforms must deploy adequate safeguards, including effective content review mechanisms and rapid takedown processes, to prevent foreseeable harm.

Falana’s lawyer, Olumide Babalola, hailed the judgment as a significant development in Nigerian jurisprudence, reinforcing platform accountability under the NDPA and weakening the traditional defence often relied upon by Big Tech. He highlighted that the case clarified misconceptions in Nigerian practice by affirming that health data enjoys heightened protection, even for public figures.

This ruling not only vindicates Falana but also sets a precedent for privacy and data protection enforcement in Nigeria. It signals a shift towards holding global technology companies accountable for the accuracy and integrity of content on their platforms, especially when such content involves sensitive personal information.