In Makhanya v Vodacom Service Provider Company the Court ruled that callers making unsolicited calls from a private number were a violation of Makhanya’s right to privacy. The judgment impacts the Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA) and a person’s right to protection against harassment from others. The Court ordered Vodacom to supply Makhanya with information to identify the caller who harassed him with persistent calls for several months.
Who should care about this judgment and why?
- Telecommunication providers because they must provide information to identify callers who harass others.
- The general public because they have a right to protection against harassment from others.
- The Information Regulator because they must enforce laws to protect people’s rights to privacy and access to information.
What could you do about it?
- Learn how to protect your privacy rights by reading our post about lodging a complaint.
- Dive into the detail by reading the full judgment.
- Access other relevant judgments by joining a Michalsons programme.
Our insights on the judgment
This judgment does not influence our position on direct marketing and unsolicited phone calls. It impacts PAIA and a person’s right to protection against harassment. Makhanya complained of calls from an unidentified person who refused to speak when he answered the phone. The judgment did not relate to direct marketing from private numbers.
Digest
Makhanya, a subscriber of Vodacom, was receiving unsolicited calls from a private number for several months. He had no idea who the caller was and asked Vodacom to disclose the number to him. Vodacom informed him that the law prevented them from providing the information to him.
The Court ruled that callers making unsolicited calls from a private number were a violation of Makhanya’s right to privacy. The Court clarified the legal position about access to information and held that section 50 of PAIA provides for the right of access to a private body’s records.
Order
The Court ordered Vodacom to supply Makhanya with information to identify the caller who harassed him with persistent calls for several months.
Details of Makhanya v Vodacom Service Provider Company (Pty) Ltd
- Universal citation: [2009] ZAGPPHC 156
- Also reported at 2010 (3) SA 79 (GNP)
- Full name: Makhanya v Vodacom Service Provider Company (Pty) Ltd
Please note: The summary of this judgment is not intended for a general audience. It is specifically drafted for the members of the Michalsons Access to Information programme.
