An advocate's image used to advertise a business without consent draws Kshs 1.5 million in damages

An advocate's image and an accompanying caption were published on social media for commercial advertising without his consent. The business argued he had voluntarily posed for the photograph at its premises, where a general notice was displayed at the entrance. The Court held that a general notice at an entrance is not specific, informed consent to commercial use of a person's image, that the doctrine of exhaustion did not apply because the claim raised constitutional questions beyond the ODPC's reach, and that the unlawful dissemination was an intrusion into the plaintiff's private life under Articles 28 and 31. A separate defamation claim failed for lack of evidence that the plaintiff's reputation had actually been affected, but the privacy claim succeeded with a substantial damages award and a permanent injunction.