Imo court dismisses $25m privacy suit against Meta

The High Court of Imo State has dismissed a fundamental rights suit seeking US$25 million in damages from Meta Platforms Inc. over alleged violations of privacy and data protection rights.

The suit was filed by Chika B. Chukwuemeka, who accused Meta of collecting, processing, profiling and using her personal data for behavioural advertising without her consent.

Delivering judgment on July 21, 2026, Justice L. C. Alinnor of the Mbaitoli/Ikeduru Judicial Division held that the applicant failed to establish that Meta had violated her constitutional right to privacy or unlawfully processed her personal data.

Chukwuemeka had argued that Meta’s alleged activities contravened Section 37 of the Constitution and provisions of the Nigeria Data Protection Act 2023.

Among other reliefs, she asked the court to declare the alleged processing of her personal data unlawful, restrain Meta from further processing the data and compel the company to bring its data-processing operations in Nigeria into compliance with the Act.

She also sought an order directing Meta to file an affidavit of compliance.

The applicant claimed US$10 million in general damages and US$15 million in exemplary damages, as well as post-judgment interest at the prevailing Central Bank of Nigeria rate until the judgment debt was fully paid.

However, the court found that a substantial part of the case was based on Final Orders previously issued against Meta by the Nigeria Data Protection Commission (NDPC).

The orders had subsequently been challenged before the Federal High Court in Abuja in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/355/2025, Meta Platforms, Inc. v. Nigeria Data Protection Commission.

The proceedings ended in a consent judgment under which the NDPC’s Final Orders were set aside.

Upholding submissions by Meta’s counsel, Paul Mgbeoma, the Imo State High Court held that the orders became otiose after they were set aside and could no longer form the basis of Chukwuemeka’s case.

The court further held that, even without relying on the NDPC orders, the applicant had failed to provide sufficient evidence demonstrating how Meta specifically infringed her privacy rights.

According to the court, the remaining allegations were largely bare assertions and did not contain enough factual detail to support a judgment against Meta.

The court consequently held that, following the collapse of the regulatory foundation on which a substantial part of the claim rested, the applicant’s case was “built on nothing”.

The suit was therefore dismissed in its entirety for want of merit.