Miguna was labeled as a Politically Exposed Person (PEP) in Refinitiv’s "World-Check Database" due to his previous role as an advisor to Kenya’s prime minister.
A client’s money transfer to Miguna via Moneygram was blocked pending verification. This involved customer service interactions managed by Sitel on behalf of Moneygram.
Miguna alleged defamation by Sitel during these communications and sought $900,000 in damages.
Miguna later settled with Moneygram and signed a release covering all claims against Moneygram, Refinitiv, and Sitel in April 2022.
Despite the release, Miguna initiated a defamation and breach of privacy lawsuit against Refinitiv and Sitel.
Lower Court Decision:
The motion judge granted summary judgment dismissing Miguna’s claims.
Held that:
Refinitiv’s PEP designation was accurate based on public information.
No privacy breach occurred since all data was publicly sourced.
Sitel was protected by the previously signed release and, alternatively, no evidence of defamatory statements existed.
Appeal Court Ruling:
The Ontario Court of Appeal upheld the summary judgment dismissal, finding Miguna’s claims baseless.
The court emphasized that Miguna, a practicing lawyer, should have known his claims were meritless.
The court also upheld substantial indemnity cost awards against Miguna ($200,000 for Refinitiv, $65,000 for Sitel), deeming his litigation strategy unreasonable and aimed at inflating costs.
Outcome:
Appeal dismissed.
Additional costs awarded: $11,000 each to Refinitiv and Sitel for the appeal (a total of $22,000).
