By Andrew Kariuki

Safaricom Limited has been listed among parties in a Ksh1.3 billion case before the High Court in Nairobi, stemming from a 2016 tender for a youth-focused advertising campaign.

The case was filed by Transcend Media Group Limited (TMG), which had participated in the tender using a concept dubbed “Next Nation.” TMG was, however, not selected after the evaluation process.

According to court records, the contract was ultimately awarded to Saracen Media Kenya Limited, which later rolled out the “Blaze Kenya” campaign. TMG claims there were similarities between the two concepts, an issue that is now before the court for determination.

The dispute also brings into focus the actions of two individuals who were employees of TMG at the time. The company alleges that they were involved in a competing bid during the same tender process, raising questions about internal confidentiality and conflict of interest. These claims remain unproven and will be examined during the hearing.

Safaricom’s procurement process, which involved multiple agencies and structured evaluation procedures, is expected to be scrutinised as part of the case. The proceedings will assess whether the tender was conducted in line with applicable standards and whether any proprietary material was improperly used.

TMG further alleges that there was communication between Safaricom personnel and other agencies during the tender period, which it claims influenced aspects of competing proposals. These assertions are disputed and will be tested against the evidence presented in court.

The firm is seeking damages exceeding Ksh1.3 billion, citing alleged infringement, breach of duty and loss of commercial opportunity. It has also referenced earlier tenders in 2013 and 2014 as part of its broader case.

The matter is now headed for full trial, where the High Court will examine procurement conduct, employee roles in competitive bidding, and the legal protections around intellectual property in commercial engagements.

Safaricom has not issued a public response to the suit and the court’s eventual ruling will determine the outcome of the claims.