Meta contests $25,000 Falana judgment, citing jurisdictional flaws

Meta has appealed a $25,000 ruling in Femi Falana’s privacy suit, disputing jurisdiction and liability, in a case that could shape how Nigerian courts hold global tech firms accountable for data rights.

Meta has formally appealed a Lagos High Court judgment ordering it to pay $25,000 in damages to Femi Falana over alleged privacy violations. In its notice of appeal, Meta is asking the appellate court to overturn the earlier ruling, arguing that the trial court erred in both its interpretation of the law and its findings of fact.

The company argues that Falana’s suit was improperly brought under Nigeria’s fundamental rights rules, insisting that the claims, relating to alleged reputational damage and a misleading publication, do not constitute enforceable fundamental rights violations.

Meta also argues that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to hear the matter under that framework, rendering the judgment invalid. It further claims that the court failed to properly evaluate evidence before reaching its decision.

The dispute stems from a Facebook video that allegedly linked Falana to a health-related claim. The senior advocate argued that the content violated his right to privacy and damaged his reputation, prompting the lawsuit.

In its ruling, the Lagos High Court agreed with Falana and awarded $25,000 in damages. However, Meta is now asking the appellate court to set aside that decision in its entirety.

The evidence is not sufficient – Meta argues its case

The company insists there is insufficient evidence to show it created, published, or directly controlled the video. It also argues that holding it liable for user-generated content sets a problematic legal precedent.

Additionally, Meta claims the damages awarded were excessive and unsupported by the facts presented at trial. It is therefore seeking to have the judgment set aside entirely.

Related Story:

Worldcoin deletes Kenyans’ biometric data following court order