Contents

1. Summary
   1. Facts
   2. Holding
2. Comment
3. Further resources
4. Decision

Summary

In a legal matter concerning a dispute over the court's jurisdiction to adjudicate a claim pertaining to personal data protection and privacy, the court ultimately sided with the defendant's preliminary objection. Consequently, it determined that it lacked the initial jurisdiction necessary to preside over the data protection case.

Facts

The Plaintiff, Fatna Faradji Kayuga filed a suit against the defendant, MIC Tanzania (PLC) Ltd, trading as "TIGO" a telecommunications company for interfering with her personal privacy and circulating her private communications. The Plaintiff sought damages and an unconditional apology from the defendant.

The defendant raised a preliminary objection, arguing that the suit is filed in the wrong forum based on the provisions of the Personal Data Protection Act and its regulations.

The defendant contends that the Personal Data Protection Commission has the authority to handle such disputes and order compensation, and therefore, the court lacks jurisdiction to entertain the matter. In response, the plaintiff's argued that the case concerns tortious liability and not the collection or processing of data, and therefore, it should be heard in court. The plaintiff's counsel also disputed the defendant's interpretation of the law and urged the court to dismiss the preliminary objection.

The court ultimately sustained the preliminary objection.

Holding

The Court held that:

• The Personal Data Protection Commission has the authority to order compensation for data protection violations, and the plaintiff should have exhausted other remedies before resorting to court.
• The court struck out the case, citing lack of jurisdiction.

Comment

One of the first reported cases recognising the jurisdiction of the Regulator as regards data protection and privacy matters in Tanzania.

Further resources