Cases
Gladys Jepkoech Kemboi vs Diamond Trust Bank and Jubilee Insurance Company Limited
Case Summary
Gladys Jepkoech Kemboi (Complainant) alleged that Diamond Trust Bank (1st Respondent) infringed her right to privacy by sharing her personal details including her bank account details, KRA number and Identification Number to Jubilee Insurance Company Limited (2nd Respondent). According to the Complainant, during a visit to the bank, an employee of the insurance company approached her, offering an insurance package. Although she signed a blank document, she contends that she did not provide explicit consent for enrollment in the insurance policy. The complainant alleged that the employee of the 2nd respondent then proceeded to fill in the insurance forms after receiving her personal details from the 1st respondent where she had an account.
The 1st respondent in its defence stated that the information required to sign up for the insurance policy went over and beyond the details that the bank had. Consequently, they inferred that only the Complainant could have supplied her personal details to the insurance company.
Issues for Determination:
- Whether there was a violation of the Complainant’s rights under the Act; and
- Whether the Complainant is entitled to any remedies under the Act and the attendants Regulations
Determination:
The Complainant did not adequately prove that the first respondent gave out her personal information. She was requested to provide additional information but failed to do so. As such, the ODPC found that the Complainant’s rights under the Act were not infringed.
Consequently, the Complainant is not entitled to any remedies under The Act or under the Attendant Regulations.
Case Analysis:
The Act, under Section 26(a) stipulates that a data subject must be informed of the use to which his or her personal data was to be put. Additionally, section 25 of The Act states that every data controller shall ensure that personal data is processed in accordance with the right to privacy. This case highlights that while personal data of every Kenyan shall be protected, a complainant must sufficiently show how his or her right was breached. In this case, the Complainant did not prove that her personal data including her family’s history and information regarding her weight and height came from the first respondent. She did not show that the first respondent had access to such data nor did she show that the 1st respondent then shared this data with the insurance company.