The Judiciary of Kenya has broken its silence on the high-profile Dari Limited dispute, offering a detailed account of the legal journey that culminated in a major setback for Raphael Tuju.
In a statement issued on Wednesday, March 18, 2026, Judiciary Spokesperson Paul Ndemo said the matter has drawn significant public attention following a recent High Court ruling, prompting the institution to clarify the legal principles and history underpinning the decision.
At the heart of the dispute is a long-standing debt owed to lenders, who have been seeking to recover more than USD 15 million through the realization of securities tied to properties owned by the plaintiffs. The case, however, is far from new.
According to the Judiciary, it has traversed multiple courts and jurisdictions over the years, with key determinations already made.
A decisive judgment was delivered in 2019 by the High Court of Justice in England and Wales, ordering repayment of the debt. That decision was subsequently recognized and enforced in Kenya by the High Court of Kenya in 2020. Efforts to halt enforcement suffered further blows when the Court of Appeal of Kenya upheld the ruling in 2023, and the Supreme Court of Kenya declined to grant interim relief.
Despite this legal trail, the plaintiffs returned to court seeking fresh injunctive orders to stop the sale of the properties. The High Court, after reviewing the pleadings and submissions, found that the application essentially reintroduced issues that had already been conclusively determined by competent courts.
It is on this basis that the court invoked the doctrine of res judicata, a legal principle that bars the re-litigation of matters that have already been settled. The Judiciary emphasized that the validity of the financial agreement, the amount owed, and the lenders’ right to enforce the securities had all been firmly established in earlier proceedings.
The court went further, finding that the attempt to reframe similar claims under constitutional arguments amounted to an abuse of the court process. Consequently, it struck out the plaintiffs’ amended suit, dismissed the application for injunction, and lifted all interim orders that had previously blocked the realization of the properties.
Even as the ruling clears the way for lenders to proceed with debt recovery, the legal battle is not entirely over. The plaintiffs have since lodged an appeal before the Court of Appeal of Kenya, setting the stage for another round in the protracted dispute.
The Judiciary has urged restraint among all parties and the public, cautioning against commentary that could undermine the ongoing appellate process and reiterating its commitment to transparency, accountability, and the rule of law.
