A Lagos High Court sitting at Tafawa Balewa Square (TBS) has awarded $25,000 in damages to human rights lawyer Femi Falana in a $5 million lawsuit against Meta Platforms Inc. over the alleged invasion of his privacy.
The suit followed the publication of a video on Facebook in early 2025, which falsely claimed that Falana was suffering from a terminal illness.
Delivering judgment on Tuesday, Justice Olalekan Oresanya held that Meta, which hosts and monetises content on its platform, owes a duty of care to individuals affected by information disseminated through its services.
Falana, through his counsel, Olumide Babalola, accused the United States-based technology company of publishing a video containing motion images and voice captions titled “AfriCare Health Centre,” which suggested that he was suffering from prostatitis.
He argued that the publication violated his constitutional right to privacy as guaranteed under Section 37 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended).
Falana told the court that the video damaged his reputation, portrayed him inaccurately, and caused him mental and emotional distress by disclosing alleged health information without his consent.
In its judgment, the court rejected the argument that digital platforms can rely solely on intermediary or hosting defences where the platform derives commercial benefit from content and where harm from misinformation is reasonably foreseeable.
Justice Oresanya ruled that Falana’s status as a public figure does not extinguish his right to privacy, particularly in relation to sensitive medical information. The court held that the publication constituted an unlawful intrusion into his private life.
The judge further held that Meta determines the means and purposes of processing content on its platform, monetises pages, and controls content distribution through algorithms, making it a joint data controller alongside page owners.
On this basis, Meta was found liable for the publication.
The court also ruled that Meta breached Section 24 of the Nigeria Data Protection Act (NDPA) by processing personal data that was inaccurate, harmful, lacked lawful justification, and was unfair to the claimant. The alleged health information was classified as unlawfully processed sensitive personal data.
Justice Oresanya held that where the risk of inaccuracy is foreseeable, particularly concerning health data, a platform has a duty to ensure accuracy and integrity.
The court further found that Meta failed to implement adequate safeguards, including effective content review and takedown mechanisms, to prevent or mitigate harm.
Reacting to the judgment, Falana’s lawyer, Olumide Babalola, said the ruling reinforces platform accountability under Nigerian law and affirms that health data remains protected, even for public figures.
