Case Note
Onduko v Squier & Another
A petitioner was subjected to persistent unwanted phone calls and messages, had images and video of her residence taken and circulated, and was discussed in a neighbourhood WhatsApp group created specifically about her, ostensibly over animal welfare concerns. The respondents argued this was a lawful, reasonable response to noise complaints and that the petitioner should have pursued alternative dispute resolution. The Court held the doctrines of exhaustion and constitutional avoidance did not bar the petition, that unauthorised surveillance and dissemination of material about a neighbour violated Articles 28 and 31, and awarded substantial compensation and permanent injunctions restraining further contact and filming — while dismissing a companion defamation claim for want of evidence.
Whether you are defending a complaint, appealing a determination, or bringing a privacy claim of your own, the forum you choose and the procedural record you build early usually decide the outcome.
Muchangi Patrick & Associates Advocates represents complainants and respondents before the Office of the Data Protection Commissioner and on appeal, judicial review and constitutional petition before the High Court.
See how your own organisation would score against the same twenty benchmarks the ODPC and the courts test disputes like this one against.
Muchangi Patrick & Associates Advocates