The University of Nairobi (UoN) and a private real estate developer are embroiled in a protracted court battle over a prime parcel of land valued at Sh450 million.
The dispute, which has dragged on for years, could redefine public land ownership and expose the government to compensation claims exceeding Sh1.2 billion.
The case pits UoN against Wathanangu Holdings Ltd, with the Attorney-General, Kenya Medical Training College (KMTC), the Chief Land Registrar, and the National Land Commission (NLC) listed as co-defendants.
The Environment and Land Court in Machakos has issued multiple rulings shaping the trial, with both parties accusing each other of unlawful conduct.
At the heart of the dispute is a land parcel that Wathanangu claims it legally acquired in 1995 from Silver Clouds Investment Limited, a company that had been allotted the property by the government.
The developer maintains that despite holding a valid title, State actions have hindered development, causing significant financial losses. According to Wathanangu, interference began in 1999 when a caveat was placed on the title. Though later removed, subsequent actions—including the fencing of adjacent land—allegedly blocked access and stalled development.
The firm estimates the land’s current value at Sh450 million, with projected rental income losses totalling Sh1.26 billion since 2001.
But UoN disputes these allegations, insisting the land is public property. The university alleges fraud in the land’s transfer and seeks cancellation of Wathanangu’s title.
It argues the property was meant for institutional use and should be reverted to its ownership.
The university’s position gained traction when the court permitted an amended defence, adding Silver Clouds Investment Limited and former Lands Registrar Wilson Gachanja as parties.
The court deemed their inclusion necessary to fully examine fraud allegations tied to the original allotment.
Wathanangu has been pursuing compensation for being "unlawfully deprived" of the land for decades.
However, the court recently barred the firm from submitting a fresh valuation report, citing an abuse of process.
The court noted that Wathanangu had previously been blocked from presenting an expert valuation and could not "circumvent the process to introduce new evidence."
The case hinges on a critical question: Is the land private property unlawfully restricted by the state, or public land acquired irregularly and now subject to repossession?
The final ruling may determine not only ownership but also potential liability for damages—either against the state and UoN or against Wathanangu’s long-held title.
