Businessman Richard Kimani has moved to the Supreme Court after filing a notice of appeal challenging a Court of Appeal judgment in a long-running land dispute involving property in Kwale County. The decision he is contesting overturned an earlier High Court ruling that had affirmed him as the lawful owner of the contested land.
In the notice of appeal, Kimani expressed dissatisfaction with the appellate court’s judgment delivered on December 11, 2025. The ruling set aside a High Court decision that had declared him the rightful owner of land parcel Kwale Galu Kinondo 676, a 0.9-hectare property at the centre of the dispute.
The appeal marks the latest chapter in a case that has stretched over several decades, involving competing ownership claims and allegations of fraud within land administration offices.
Richard Kimani Land Dispute Moves to Supreme Court
The Court of Appeal bench, comprising Justices Francis Tuiyott, Lydia Achode, and Aggrey Muchelule, overturned the Environment and Land Court judgment delivered in January 2022. That earlier judgment had been issued by Justice L L Naikuni and had ruled in Kimani’s favour.
However, the appellate judges found that the judgment was procedurally flawed. They ruled that it had been written and delivered by a judge who did not hear any of the witnesses testify during the trial. As a result, they ordered that the entire case be heard afresh.
According to the Court of Appeal, justice would have been better served if the judge who heard and observed the witnesses had completed the matter. The judges noted that there had been an express order that Justice Charles Yano, who presided over the full trial, would prepare the judgment, and that order was never formally set aside.
Competing Titles at the Centre of the Dispute
The Richard Kimani land dispute revolves around two competing certificates of title over the same parcel of land. Kimani holds a title issued in December 1978, while British national Sheila Loveridge holds another title obtained through a chain of transactions beginning in 2004.
Kimani has consistently maintained that he purchased the land in 1974 for Ksh 5,000. He argues that his name appeared in official land adjudication records long before the issuance of his title. According to him, this made his registration the first and lawful one.
The businessman says he only discovered the problem in 2008 when he found the land occupied and developed. It was then, he claims, that he learned the property had been sold to Loveridge through intermediaries.
Fraud Allegations and High Court Findings
At the High Court, Kimani accused several parties, including a former Kwale Land Registrar, of fraud. He alleged that land records were unlawfully altered to dispossess him of the property.
The trial court agreed with his claims. It ruled that Kimani’s title constituted the first registration, awarded him damages, ordered the cancellation of Loveridge’s title, and directed her eviction from the land.
Those findings, however, were never examined on merit by the Court of Appeal. Instead, the appellate judges focused on the procedural issue surrounding the delivery of the judgment.
Appeal Court Orders Fresh Hearing
In her appeal, Loveridge challenged both the substance of the High Court decision and the manner in which it was delivered. She argued that Justice Naikuni erred by writing and delivering the judgment despite not having heard the witnesses, contrary to earlier directions.
The Court of Appeal agreed with that argument. It declined to address the substantive ownership issues and instead ordered that the entire judgment be set aside. The judges directed that the case be heard afresh before a different judge of the Environment and Land Court.
Citing the long passage of time and the need for fairness, the court also ordered that the matter be prioritised and heard on an expedited basis. Each party was directed to bear its own costs.
What the Supreme Court Appeal Seeks
By moving to the Supreme Court, Kimani is seeking to overturn the appellate court’s decision and reinstate the High Court judgment that recognised him as the lawful owner of the land. His appeal raises questions about procedural justice, finality of judgments, and the balance between technical errors and substantive rights.
As the Richard Kimani land dispute heads to the country’s highest court, the outcome is expected to have wider implications for land litigation, especially cases involving historical titles and procedural irregularities.
