Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Caselaw
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELRCPartially AllowedNot stated in the judgment as provided· [2025] KEELRC 1695 (KLR)

Flodida Construction Machinery Limited v Wanyonyi (Cause E017 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 1695 (KLR)

Employment and Labour Relations Court
12 June 2025
JGJACOB GAKERI
2,109 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~8 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

A Kenyan employment court ordered Safaricom to release an ex-manager's M-Pesa statements as court evidence, ruling privacy rights yield when needed for a legal claim.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The applicant/claimant, an employer, brought a Notice of Motion dated 13th May, 2025 seeking an order compelling Safaricom PLC (Interested Party) to furnish certified M-pesa statements for two telephone numbers (0720 288344 and 0720486810) for the period between 1st August, 2023 and 16th December, 2024, plus leave to file additional documents and a witness statement. The applicant alleges that the respondent, its former Operations Manager, diverted Kshs.28,167,721 of quarry sales proceeds by directing customers to pay into the respondent's M-pesa lines instead of the company's KCB account, out of total sales of Kshs.99,078,085 against banked deposits of Kshs.70,910,364. Two customer deponents (Jaquelyne Ahoya and Ben Ouma Otieno) attested to paying Kshs.563,800 and Kshs.900,600 respectively into the 0720 288344 line after being told the company belonged to the respondent. The respondent opposed the application as an abuse of process and a fishing expedition infringing his Article 31 right to privacy. The court framed a single issue: whether the Interested Party ought to be compelled to provide the information. Relying on Section 22 of the Civil Procedure Act and discovery jurisprudence, the court held that the information sought was specific and necessary for a just determination, that the privacy right is not absolute and is qualified by Section 45(c)(i) of the Data Protection Act, and noted the respondent's failure to swear an affidavit denying ownership of the lines. The motion was allowed in part: only the statement for 0720 288344 was ordered produced within 21 days, leave to file additional documents was granted, and costs were made to abide the outcome of the suit.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether Safaricom PLC (Interested Party) should be compelled to produce certified M-pesa statements for the respondent's phone numbers

Holding

Yes, in part - the statement for 0720 288344 was ordered to be furnished within 21 days, as the information is specific, relevant and necessary for a just determination of the suit

Reasoning

The court found the application was an exception to the Article 31 access-to-information right and that the information sought was specific to a defined period. The respondent's privacy objection failed because he did not elucidate the alleged infringement, did not swear an affidavit denying ownership of the lines, and Section 45(c)(i) of the Data Protection Act permits processing of data necessary for the establishment, exercise or defence of a legal claim.

p. 5
02

Whether production of the M-pesa records would infringe the respondent's right to privacy under Article 31 of the Constitution

Holding

No - the privacy right is qualified by law and the respondent did not demonstrate how it would be violated

Reasoning

The respondent asserted a privacy objection relying on Article 31 but did not explain the alleged infringement. The court noted the request was for specific transactions over a defined period. Section 45(c)(i) of the Data Protection Act expressly permits processing of sensitive personal data where necessary for the establishment, exercise or defence of a legal claim, qualifying the privacy right.

p. 4

Legal principles established

#
  • The right to privacy under Article 31 is not absolute and may be qualified by law, including for the establishment, exercise or defence of a legal claim under Section 45(c)(i) of the Data Protection Act
  • Discovery is a broad pre-trial process enabling a party to obtain vital documents solely in the custody of the opposite party, provided the documents are relevant and not sought as a fishing expedition

Court orders

#
  1. 1.The Interested Party shall furnish the Applicant/Claimant with certified copies of M-pesa statements for cell phone number 0720 288344 for the period between 1st August, 2023 and 16th December, 2024 within 21 days
  2. 2.The Applicant/Claimant has leave to file additional list and bundle of documents and witness statements within 21 days
  3. 3.Costs shall abide the outcome of the suit
Jurisdiction invoked
Employment and Labour Relations Court (Procedure) Rules, 2024, Rules 45 and 55; Section 22 of the Civil Procedure Act

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Flodida Construction Machinery Limited v Wanyonyi (Cause E017 of 2025) [2025] KEELRC 1695 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment as provided. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelrc/2025/1695/eng@2025-06-12

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.