The Supreme Court has temporarily halted efforts to recover KSh1.5 billion paid as compensation for land occupied by Ruaraka High School and Drive-In Primary School, pending the hearing and determination of a case challenging the Court of Appeal’s decision in the long-running dispute.
The interim orders were issued on August 18, 2026, in Supreme Court Petition, E025 of 2026 following an application by Huelands Limited.
The orders stay execution of the judgement delivered by the Court of Appeal on July 3, 2026, pending the determination of a Notice of Motion filed before the apex court.
The Supreme Court has, in the meantime, barred the National Land Commission (NLC) from demanding or taking steps to recover the KSh1.5 billion paid as compensation for the portions of land occupied by the two schools.
The court has also stopped any investigation, arrest, charging or prosecution of Huelands Limited, Afrison Export Import Limited, Whispering Palms Estate Limited, or their directors and officers in relation to the payment.
ALSO READ:
- Kilifi Man Jailed 30 Years for Defiling and Trafficking 16-Year-Old Girl
- Man Sentenced to 10 Years for Attempted Murder of Wajir Police Officer
It has further prohibited any alteration, rectification, cancellation or amendment of the land register relating to L.R. Nos. 7879/4, 7879/24 and 7879/25, as well as demolition, re-entry, eviction, transfer, charging or other interference with the disputed portions of land.
The orders temporarily interrupt steps that had ben initiated by the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission (EACC) following the Court of Appeal judgement.
The commission says it had commenced efforts to recover the KSh1.5 billion and was considering criminal accountability measures against persons alleged to have participated in, facilitated or benefited from the payment.
The dispute centres on approximately 13.5 acres of land on which Ruaraka High School and Drive-In Primary School stand.
According to investigations cited by the EACC, the land had been surrendered to the government free of charge through an approved subdivision plan in 1983.
A claim for compensation was nevertheless lodged with the NLC in 2017, leading to the payment of KSh1.5 billion to Afrison Export Import Limited and Huelands Limited through Whispering Palms Estate Limited.
The investigations identified what the commission described as significant irregularities involving public officials at the Ministry of Education and the NLC. Huelands and Afrison have, however, disputed the account.
In their Supreme Court petition, the companies argue that L.R. No. 7879/4 remains private land registered in their names and that the portions occupied by the two schools were never surrendered to the government.
They maintain that the KSh1.5 billion was the first tranche of a negotiated KSh3.2 billion compensation award for compulsory acquisition of approximately 13.5 acres.
The applicants further contend that Whispering Palms Estate Limited was duly appointed as their agent or nominee to receive the first tranche of the compensation.
They have asked the Supreme Court to find that there was no loss of public funds arising from the KSh1.5 billion payment and to order the NLC to pay them the outstanding KSh1.769 billion balance of the compensation.
The dispute has been before the courts for several years. In a judgement delivered on June 28, 2019, the Environment and Land Court found that the two schools stood on public land and that the government had lost KSh1.5 billion already paid as compensation.
The court held that the land was not subject to compulsory acquisition because the government’s interest in the public amenity plots had crystallised through the approved subdivision process.
The Court of Appeal subsequently upheld the central finding on July 3, 2026.
Although Huelands and Afrison remained the registered proprietors of the parent title L.R. No. 7879/4, the appellate court found that the portions reserved for Ruaraka High School and Drive-In Primary School had been validly surrendered to the government through the subdivision process.
The Court of Appeal consequently held that the portions constituted public land, meaning the NLC had no legal basis to compulsory acquire them.
It further found the KSh1.5 billion compensation payment unlawful and dismissed the appeal, substantially upholding the Environment and Land Court’s findings.
The appellate court also held that there had been a de facto surrender of the land despite the absence of a formally registered surrender instrument.
Following that judgement, the EACC announced that it would pursue recovery of the KSh1.5 billion and resume investigations into possi
The appellate court also held that there had been a de facto surrender of the land despite the absence of a formally registered surrender instrument.
Following that judgment, the EACC announced that it would pursue recovery of the KSh1.5 billion and resume investigations into possible criminal culpability.
The commission had previously forwarded its inquiry file to the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) in February 2025, but the DPP had advised that action await the outcome of the Court of Appeal proceedings.
The Supreme Court orders now place those recovery and enforcement measures on hold pending the ongoing proceedings.
The EACC has separately challenged the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction to hear the appeal under Article 163(4)(a) of the Constitution. That application remains pending before the apex court.
The Supreme Court will therefore have to determine the applicants’ constitutional and land-related arguments, including whether the historical subdivision process validly converted the disputed portions into public land and whether the subsequent compensation was lawful.
The applicants contend that the case raises fundamental questions concerning private property rights, land registration, compulsory acquisition and the constitutional protection of property.
