The Environment and Land Court has stopped further construction and other dealings on disputed land near Nyayo National Stadium, protecting businesses associated with Kiambu Governor Paul Kimani Wamatangi pending determination of their Sh14 billion claim against Kenya Railways Corporation.
Justice Oscar Angote barred Kenya Railways, the police and other respondents from undertaking further construction, excavation, development, alteration or interference with property, a 0.5723-hectare parcel off Lang’ata Road.
The order also protects machinery, rollers and equipment and other equipment belonging to four companies linked to the Governor. The four companies named in the ruling are Superclean Shine Enterprise Ltd, King Prime International Ltd, Prime The Place Ltd and Prime Auto and General Enterprises Ltd.
The court identifies King Prime International’s director as Mr Wamatangi. The ruling shields the four companies from further interference with the disputed land, construction and equipment left on site pending determination of the petition.
However, the court clarified that the companies may remove the equipment if they wish, but the order does not permit them to re-enter or resume occupation of the land before the petition is heard and determined.
The dispute began after structures on the property were demolished on the night of January 13 into January 14, 2026, with the companies alleging unlawful interference with their occupation and business premises.
The demolition and deployment of police officers amid the dispute over the land triggered court proceedings, with the companies seeking orders to stop further interference and preserve their claimed interests in the property.
The companies sued seeking declarations that their eviction and the demolition were unlawful and violated their constitutional rights.
They are seeking more than Sh14 billion from the government, comprising Sh300 million for demolished structures, Sh100 million for destroyed motor vehicles and trucks, Sh200 million for construction equipment, Sh150 million for equipment and property stored in containers, and Sh13.32 billion in lost rental income for the remaining 74 years of the alleged lease.
They are also seeking general, aggravated and punitive damages, a permanent injunction against further interference with the land, personal liability for three public officials, their removal from public office, indemnity against related claims and legal costs.
The property housed a cluster of businesses, including a car yard, car wash, garage, restaurant, carpet-cleaning service, small hotels, M-Pesa shops and a barber shop. The premises also accommodated small traders whose livelihoods depended on the site.
The companies told the court that the developments supported businesses employing more than 150 people directly and another 500 indirectly.
The legal dispute centres on King Prime International Limited’s claim that it leased the property from Kenya Railways on May 2, 2001, for 99 years. The company says it occupied the land for more than 25 years and paid rent before structures on the site were demolished in December 2025.
Kenya Railways disputes the lease’s authenticity and validity, arguing that it was improperly executed and that the land falls within a railway safety reserve. It says the companies had been evicted and that a railway station was being built on the site to serve Talanta Stadium and Nyayo National Stadium ahead of the Africa Cup of Nations.
At the same time, the court declined to review its July 9 ruling, which had lifted earlier orders barring interference with the disputed land. This was because the companies failed to inform him that a parallel case had already been struck out.
The judge had vacated those orders after finding that a parallel case was pending before the magistrates’ court, but the companies later sought fresh protection after that case was struck out for lack of jurisdiction on April 29, 2026.
Justice Angote said the companies had opportunities to disclose the development, even after submissions had been completed and a ruling reserved. Their explanation that they considered the two cases separate, he said, “demonstrates that the non-disclosure was a deliberate litigation choice rather than the result of circumstances beyond their control.”
He warned that parties could not withhold material information, wait for an unfavourable decision and then use review proceedings to seek “a second bite at the cherry.” He consequently rejected the review application.
However, the judge considered the companies’ alternative request for fresh protection on its own merits, noting that the earlier applications had not been determined substantively because of the parallel proceedings.
The companies maintain that their lease gave them rights over the property and that their developments were demolished unlawfully. Kenya Railways disputes those claims and says the alleged agreement lacked proper corporate authorization, bore no corporate seal and did not conform to its standard lease arrangements.
Justice Angote said the court was not deciding whether the lease was valid, fraudulent or unenforceable. Those questions, he said, “can only properly be determined upon consideration of the parties’ evidence at the hearing.”
He found that the companies had established a strong case, citing evidence of the alleged agreement and their previous occupation. He also noted that Kenya Railways did not deny its intention to continue construction, making the risk of further interference real rather than speculative.
The corporation told the court the new railway station was due for completion in January 2027 and that delays could cost an estimated Sh5 million daily. The judge acknowledged the public interest in the project but said it also required respect for the law and pending court proceedings.
The case is scheduled for hearing on December 3, 2026.
