Woes bedevilling former Cabinet Secretary Raphael Tuju seem far from over.
This is after the Supreme Court declined his request to present additional evidence in a Sh3.5 billion property dispute with a regional bank.
Tuju had pleaded with the Apex court to allow him to provide the evidence saying he would be disadvantaged if the court proceeds to hear his appeal in its absence.
The additional evidence was to support his appeal in which he is challenging the seizure of property in Karen by the East African Development Bank (EADB) among other things.
In dismissing his application, a bench of five judges led by Deputy Chief Justice Philomena Mwilu said “the application reeks of a belated afterthought with the objective of filling up gaps in the case.”
The bench also declined his plea to have a response filed by the bank opposing his appeal thrown out.
Tuju claimed the affidavit by one Justina Kiragu gave a misleading background and did not respond to his appeal.
Kiragu from the court record is the principal investment officer based in the EADB country office in Kenya.
She responded and asked the court not to entertain Tuju’s application.
The Supreme Court subsequently said Tuju cannot dictate how a party should file its response.
“The petitioners are at liberty to attack the contents of the response during the hearing of the petition, within the petition itself and not through an application such as the one before us,”said the bench.
The dismissal comes a few weeks after Tujus's attempt to block two receiver managers appointed by the bank was rejected by the same Supreme Court.
In the case, the bank initially filed the case before a London Court seeking to compel Dari Ltd to offset a Sh1.5 billion loan.
The loan was meant for the construction of a flat-roofed bungalow which currently operates as a high-end restaurant.
The court subsequently allowed the regional bank to recover the money from Tuju’s real estate company.
Tuju being aggrieved with the decision filed cases at the Milimani Commercial Court and the Court of Appeal which he lost.
He has since appealed to the Supreme Court.
He has questioned the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgements in Kenya and whether such recognition renders the Kenyan law subordinate to English Law.
