NAIROBI, Kenya — The High Court has heard that a disputed Karen property linked to former Cabinet Secretary Raphael Tuju was sold and transferred before any injunction was issued, as Ultra Eureka Limited and other defendants opposed a stay application in the ongoing Dari property dispute.
During a substantive hearing before Justice Moses Ado on Tuesday, April 7, the tenth defendant argued that it lawfully purchased the contested property through public auction on October 1, 2024, and took possession after interim orders were later vacated.
Auction Timing Dispute
Ultra Eureka submitted that the property, associated with Tuju’s Dari Limited, was sold pursuant to the statutory power of sale exercised by the second defendant, Knight Frank Valuers Limited. Interim orders stopping the auction were only issued on October 28, 2024, several weeks post-sale.
“The property was sold in a public auction and transferred. When interim orders were vacated, we took possession. There is nothing to say because the property is no longer in the hands of the plaintiffs—Tuju, his family, and Dari Limited,” counsel for Ultra Eureka told the court.
The company maintains that the property has been transferred into its name, arguing that no executable interest remains for the court to preserve.
Tuju’s Stay Application
Ultra Eureka was responding to Tuju’s fresh application seeking suspension of execution of a March 9 ruling by Justice Josephine Mongare, who struck out the amended plaint and lifted interim orders restraining defendants from dealing with the property.
Tuju seeks a stay pending appeal, warning of irreparable harm if the Karen property—described as unique—is lost.
Procedural Objections
First defendant Knight Frank Valuers Limited opposed the application on procedural grounds, arguing the ruling constituted a “negative order” incapable of being stayed.
East African Development Bank (EADB), the second defendant, submitted that Tuju failed to demonstrate substantial loss and urged the recovery of securities pledged against unpaid debts.
“Facts have not changed. The debts remain unpaid, and the plaintiffs have not shown they will suffer substantial loss. The pledged securities should be allowed to be recovered,” EADB counsel argued.
Irreparable Harm Claim
Paul Nyamodi, representing Tuju and Dari, countered that property uniqueness warrants preservation pending appeal.
He raised sovereign immunity complications in recovering damages from EADB if the appeal succeeds.
“Each property is unique and if disposed and the action by plaintiff succeeds, he may not be able to recover the property as it will have gone beyond jurisdiction of court,” Nyamodi submitted.
He challenged Knight Frank’s valuation as improperly conducted, arguing it should not determine security deposit requirements.
Justice Ado directed that the ruling on the stay application will be delivered on May 7, 2026, extending interim orders barring the transfer of the disputed property pending the determination.
