The High Court of Lagos State has delivered a landmark judgment in Suit No. LD/19478MFHR/2025 in favour of a 24-year-old student, Esther Agboola, against one of the new generational Bank Plc, awarding N2 million in general damages for breach of her constitutional right to privacy and violation of the Nigeria Data Protection Act 2023.
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/TheNigerialawyer-WhatsApp-Channel1.jpg")
The judgment, delivered on 12 February 2026 by Hon. Justice A.M. Ipaye at Court No. 52 Fast Track/Commercial Division, Tapa Courthouse, represents a significant judicial intervention against the indiscriminate sharing of customers’ Bank Verification Numbers, account balances, and related financial data among financial institutions without lawful basis.
The Applicant, a student, discovered in 2025 that her bank account had been debited with the narration “SIRecovery.” She was alarmed because she had never applied for any loan. Upon inquiry, she discovered that the debit was initiated at the instance of another financial institution, following the sharing of her account balance and related financial information by her own bank.
According to her 16-paragraph affidavit, the Applicant maintained account number 6557242873 with the Respondent in which she saved money for her upkeep and other needs as a student. She stated that she has never taken any loan from any financial institution and is not indebted to any of them.
On the 19th day of April 2025, the Respondent debited the sum of N11,922.41 from the account. After the debit, she received a debit alert notification from the Respondent with the narration “SIRecovery.” Since she did not authorize the transaction, she called the Respondent’s customer care line and they informed her that she obtained a loan from a financial institution with which they shared her personal details for the purpose of recovery.
The Applicant consistently denied applying for or receiving any such facility. She averred that by the Respondent’s breach of her privacy and data subject’s right, she suffered denial of access to her funds, destabilized plans and altered choices due to lack of funds, untold hardship at the law school as she was unable to feed and buy necessaries, lack of concentration owing to lack of funds, inability to buy books and feed well, anxiety and mental depression due to the loss of her money, and feelings of harassment, dejection and helplessness as a result of the Respondent’s maltreatment.
In its defence, the bank contended that the debit arose from a loan allegedly obtained from NIRSAL Microfinance Bank under a COVID-19 household intervention scheme. The bank stated that a Global Standing Instruction was triggered by Nigeria Inter-Bank Settlement System on bank accounts linked to the Applicant for repayment purposes in favour of NIRSAL Microfinance Bank.
The Respondent maintained that it is duly licensed by the Central Bank of Nigeria and operates in accordance with applicable banking laws and regulations, and that it is fully compliant with the Nigeria Data Protection Act 2023.
However, during trial, the bank failed to produce any loan agreement executed by the Applicant, any GSI mandate signed or digitally executed by her, or any documentary proof linking her to the alleged loan.
The Applicant’s counsel effectively countered the defence by pointing out that the COVID-19 loan was meant for persons with households with verifiable evidence of livelihood adversely impacted by COVID-19, but the Applicant was a 21-year-old law student at Obafemi Awolowo University when the Respondent falsely claimed she applied for the loan. The Applicant further averred that she did not fill in any portal for application for a loan and never imputed her personal data on any portal for such purpose.
One of the most instructive aspects of the judgment is the court’s clear affirmation that bank account details constitute private and constitutionally protected information.
The court emphatically held:
“Financial information and bank account details fall within ‘material possessions’ and ‘economic identity.’ A person’s bank balance, transaction history and account identity are private.”
The court relied on the decision of the Court of Appeal in Incorporated Trustees of Digital Rights Lawyers Initiative v National Identity Management Commission, where it was held that protection of personal data forms part of the constitutional right to privacy. The court further noted that Section 37 of the Constitution provides that “the privacy of citizens, their homes, correspondence, telephone conversations and telegraphic communications is hereby guaranteed and protected.”
On the inter-bank exchange of financial data, the court found that the Respondent asserted the Global System Initiative was triggered based on a loan allegedly obtained from NIRSAL Microfinance Bank. However, no loan agreement, no GSI mandate and no proof of the Applicant’s digital execution were exhibited. In the absence of proof of any mandate or loan obligation traceable to the Applicant, the court found that the Respondent permitted the Applicant’s financial data and funds to be used for the benefit of a third party without lawful justification, constituting an unjustified intrusion into the Applicant’s financial situation and an interference with her right to privacy.
On the fairness of the bank’s sharing of customer data for the purpose of debit, the court noted that the principle of fairness requires that personal data must not be processed in a manner that is unexpected, prejudicial or unjust to the data subject. The Applicant’s account was debited in full based on an alleged indebtedness she consistently denied. No prior notice, explanation or opportunity to challenge the alleged loan was given before the debit occurred. The court found that such processing could not have been reasonably anticipated by the Applicant and was manifestly prejudicial, particularly considering her status as a student depending on the funds for basic sustenance.
On accuracy and non-misleading processing, the court found that by presenting the Applicant as a loan defaulter and effecting recovery against her account without proof of any loan agreement, the Respondent processed the Applicant’s personal data on an unverified and disputed premise. The burden rested on the Respondent as the asserting party to establish accuracy of the alleged indebtedness. This burden was not discharged.
On lawfulness of sharing customer data for loan recovery, the court found that Section 25 of the Nigeria Data Protection Act clearly stipulates that consent, contractual necessity or clear legal obligation must exist to justify processing. Regulatory frameworks such as the GSI Guideline do not operate in a vacuum; they presuppose the existence of a valid loan and an executed GSI mandate by the borrower. Where such foundational documents are absent, the invocation of GSI is legally unsustainable. Accordingly, the court held that the Respondent lacked a lawful basis to process the Applicant’s account data for automatic loan recovery.
Having found that the Applicant’s constitutional and statutory rights were violated, the court entered judgment as follows:
The court declared that the Respondent’s exposure, disclosure and processing of the Applicant’s bank account details for the purpose of offsetting an alleged loan constitutes a violation of the Applicant’s right to privacy under Section 37 of the Constitution.
The court further declared that the Respondent’s processing of the Applicant’s account violated Sections 24 and 25 of the Nigeria Data Protection Act 2023.
An Order of Perpetual Injunction was granted restraining the Respondent from further processing the Applicant’s bank account for automatic loan recovery in respect of the alleged loan.
The Respondent was ordered to immediately refund the sum of N11,922.41 to the Applicant.
The court ordered the Respondent to pay the sum of N2,000,000.00 as general damages to the Applicant.
Post-judgment interest shall accrue at the rate of 10% per annum on the total judgment sum until full and final liquidation.
Costs of N300,000.00 was awarded in favour of the Applicant.
On the claim for N50 million as general damages, the court held that damages in fundamental rights cases must be compensatory and not punitive. Considering the nature of the breach, the hardship occasioned to the Applicant, and the need for proportionality, the court was of the view that the sum of N50 million was not proportional to the hardship occasioned and same was therefore reduced accordingly.
Writing about the decision, lawyer Olumide Babalola, who appeared for the Applicant, described the judgment as a significant development for Nigerian privacy jurisprudence, noting that the decision reinforces the constitutional right to privacy and gives practical force to the statutory safeguards under the Nigeria Data Protection Act 2023.
According to Babalola, the decision sends a powerful signal that banks cannot treat BVNs and account balances as freely exchangeable institutional assets, data protection principles are judicially enforceable, the constitutional right to privacy extends fully into banking operations, and regulatory frameworks cannot override fundamental rights.
ESTHER AGBOOLA V FIDELITY JUDGMENT TheNigeriaLawyer“The Lagos High Court has, once again, demonstrated that privacy is not theoretical. It is actionable and it is enforceable,” Babalola wrote.
Muhib Owodunni holding the brief of Olumide Babalola appeared for the Applicant while Oluseyi Olukoga appeared for the Respondent.
Get your copy today and take the first step toward financial growth:👉 https://selar.co/4f16676016
_______________________________________________________________________ The Law And Practice Of Redundancy In Nigeria: A Practitioner’s Guide, Authored By A Labour & Employment Law Expert Bimbo Atilola
_______________________________________________________________________
[A MUST HAVE] Evidence Act Demystified With Recent And Contemporary Cases And Materials
Available now for NGN 40,000 at ASC Publications, 10, Boyle Street, Onikan, Lagos. Beside High Court, TBS. Email publications@ayindesanni.com or WhatsApp +2347056667384. Purchase Link: https://paystack.com/buy/evidence-act-complete-annotation
______________________________________________________________________
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE FOR LAWYERS: A COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE
Reimagine your practice with the power of AI “...this is the only Nigerian book I know of on the topic.” — Ohio Books Ltd
Authored by Ben Ijeoma Adigwe, Esq., ACIArb (UK), LL.M, Dip. in Artificial Intelligence, Director, Delta State Ministry of Justice, Asaba, Nigeria.
Bonus:
Get a FREE eBook titled “How to Use the AI in Legalpedia and Law Pavilion” with every purchase.
How to Order: 📞 Call, Text, or WhatsApp: 08034917063 | 07055285878 📧 Email: benadigwe1@gmail.com 🌐 Website: www.benadigwe.com
Ebook Version: Access directly online at: https://selar.com/prv626
