A Nigerian who dragged Airtel Nigeria to court for sending him unsolicited text messages has won N5m in damages.
Justice Jude Okeke of an FCT High Court in Maitama, Abuja on
Wednesday, slammed a fine of N5 million on Airtel Nig. Ltd for violation
of customer’s right to privacy.
The plaintiff, Mr Emmanuel Anene on Dec. 21 filed a suit against
Airtel for continue disturbances through unsolicited messages to his
line.
The judge held that the crucial issue that calls for determination
here was whether or not that the plaintiff evidence made out a case to
justify the claims in the reliefs he sought.
“One of the reliefs sought an order of the court seeks for the award of damages. A
plaintiff who seeks for a violation of right is to succeed on the
strength of his case and not on the weakness or absence of the defence.
“Though he can rely on the absence of the defence to support his case."
He said the burden of proof could shift from party to party until the issue in contention is resolved.
The court records showed that the plaintiff evidence of claims was
served on the defendant and led evidence in the support of same.
“The defendant who was afforded the opportunity failed to file
statement of defence contradicting the plaintiff’s statement of claim or
fails to lead evidence in challenge to the claims; it means he had
admitted the facts.
“Unless the court does not believe in the evidence or sees any reason in contrary in law it reserves a duty to act on such.
“The defendant failed to place any evidence on the other scale
of balance there is nothing against in which the plaintiff’s evidence
can be weighed.
Okeke held that the plaintiff complained about disturbances and
distractions which he did solicit for, from the defendant but the
defendant did not reply nor do anything about it.
“The plaintiff having purchase the defendant telephone number a
contractual relationship is satisfied, the defendant is in violation of
the right to the plaintiff privacy.
“The defendant, having received complaints from the plaintiff,
but continued to disturb the plaintiff from quiet enjoyment of the line.
“In every wrong there must be a remedy, to vindicate the
plaintiff’s right which has been violated in the forth going
circumstance by the defendant; the plaintiff shall be awarded damages
based on the discretion of the court.
“Against this background putting into consideration the obvious
inconviencies, discomfort and the embarrassments the plaintiff had
undeniably gone through.
“The defendant has been directed to pay to the plaintiff
damages not the N200 million the plaintiff asked for but N5 million
only.
-NAN
No comments:
Post a Comment