The High Court has struck out a petition filed by Woodley residents against the Nairobi County Government and other parties opposing the ongoing evictions that seek to pave the way for the affordable housing project.
In the case, Joseph Ngotho and Pinto Kali sued on their behalf, and on behalf of 41 others, all residents of Joseph Kang'ethe Estate Nairobi.
The Nairobi County Government, the Attorney General and the
National Land Commission were listed as 1st, 2nd and 3rd
respondents respectively..
Africa Reit Limited and the Law Society of Kenya were listed
as 1st and 2nd interested parties.
The petitioners, through Lawyer John Khaminwa, moved to court
to challenge the demolitions described as unlawful and contrary to the 2010
constitution.
The petitioners wanted the court to intervene in the matter
and have the demolition stopped in order to “hold human dignity and respect for
the Petitioners/Applicants right to adequate housing”.
Justice Oguttu Mboya in his ruling however stated that the
issues raised in the petition had already been addressed in prior legal
proceedings, including the Court of Appeal’s ruling in Civil Appeal No. E375 of
2020.
Additionally, the court found that the petitioners failed to
demonstrate a sufficient connection or legal interest (locus standi) to pursue
the case, thereby undermining the validity of their claims.
“Flowing from the discourse, it must have become apparent
that the Petition filed by the Petitioners herein relates to issues which have
variously been canvassed and determined in previous proceedings,” Justice
Oguttu ruled.
“Instructively, an aspect of the Petition herein touching on
the import and tenor of minute 3C of 4th August 1992 was determined vide Court
of Appeal Civil Appeal No. E375 of 2020. 209.”
Further, Justice Oguttu said:
“Other than the foregoing, it is also worth recalling that
the court came to the conclusion that the Applicants did not demonstrate and/or
establish any nexus to the suit property. In short, the Applicants did not
prove that same are seized of the requisite locus standi.”
Consequently, Justice Oguttu ordered the petition be struck
out with costs.
“The Notice of Motion Application dated 15th November 2024
be and is hereby dismissed,” he ruled.
“The costs of the Petition and the various Applications be
and are hereby awarded to the 1st and 2nd Respondents; and the 1st Interested
Party, respectively.”
The decision marks the end of a protracted legal battle over
disputed property in the area.
The costs shall be either mutually agreed upon by the
parties or, in the event of disagreement, subjected to taxation in the
conventional manner.
