By Andrew Kariuki

The Supreme Court has temporarily stopped the implementation of a Court of Appeal decision in a protracted dispute involving a Karen property estimated to be worth Ksh295.5 million, pending the hearing of an urgent application before the apex court.

In interim orders issued on May 28, 2026, the court directed that execution of the appellate judgment be suspended and that no further proceedings related to the matter move forward until parties are heard.

The order effectively preserves the current state of affairs in the dispute as the court prepares to consider arguments raised in the application filed before it.

A five-judge bench comprising Chief Justice Martha Koome, Deputy Chief Justice Philomena Mwilu, and Justices Smokin Wanjala, Isaac Lenaola and William Ouko directed that the status quo be maintained pending an inter partes hearing.

“Pending the hearing and determination of this application inter partes, an order does issue staying further proceedings with respect to, or execution of, the judgment and decree of the Court of Appeal,” the bench ruled.

The matter revolves around a 24.5-acre Karen property at the centre of a long-running legal contest involving Nyanja Limited Company, represented by advocate Cecil Miller.

Court records show the dispute has travelled through multiple levels of the judiciary, beginning with a High Court judgment delivered on May 5, 2020, before proceeding to the Court of Appeal under Civil Appeal No. 224 of 2020, later consolidated with Appeals E166 and 174 of 2021.

Following a judgment issued by the Court of Appeal on January 30, 2026, and a subsequent ruling delivered on May 8, 2026, the petitioners moved to the Supreme Court on urgency grounds seeking temporary relief against enforcement.

Through an application dated May 18, 2026, filed by advocate Cecil Miller, the petitioners argued that failure to grant interim protection could expose them to loss of possession and control over the disputed property before the Supreme Court determines the substantive issues.

They told the court that conservatory intervention was necessary to protect the property and prevent actions that could prove difficult or impossible to reverse should the appeal succeed.

According to court filings, the dispute traces back to a credit arrangement initiated in 1988, in which the Karen property was allegedly offered as collateral.

The petitioners contend that the initial facility stood at roughly Ksh8 million before evolving into a larger arrangement estimated at about Ksh11 million and involving several properties. They further claim to have repaid nearly Ksh54 million over time while disputing interest rates allegedly imposed by the lender, which they say ranged between 20 and 75 per cent annually.

They also allege that the Karen property was later transferred through a private treaty sale in 2007 to Redmars Holdings Limited for about Ksh60 million despite an alleged valuation placing the land at Ksh295.5 million.

The petitioners further accuse the lender and other parties of irregularities including fraud, illegality, conspiracy and unfair conduct, alleging the transaction bypassed a competitive public sale process. Those claims remain disputed and have yet to be conclusively determined by the courts.

For now, the Supreme Court’s intervention pauses enforcement of the appellate decision as the matter proceeds to case management and further directions before the Deputy Registrar.