The Court of Appeal has directed that construction work on a controversial 16-storey housing project in Nairobi’s Lavington estate be paused for 60 days, even as it dismissed an application by residents seeking to block the development entirely.
- •In the ruling, the Mbaazi Residents Association had requested for a stay of execution and proceedings against Metricon Home Nairobi, the developer behind the contested project.
- •Justices Wanjiru Karanja, Kathurima M’Inoti, and Lydia Achode found that the residents had not shown the appeal would be rendered ineffective if construction continued.
- •In court, the Nairobi County government sided with Metricon and NEMA in opposing the residents’ application, reinforcing the position that the project was legally sound and should not be halted.
“To that end, we allow the notice of motion dated 16th January 2025 and issue a conservatory order for a period of sixty (60) days from the date of this ruling,” the three-judge bench ruled.
The move is seen as a temporary reprieve for the residents, who have raised concerns over the project’s environmental impact, alleged lack of proper approvals, and inadequate public consultation.
While the main application was dismissed, the court acknowledged that the Lavington residents’ appeal raises an arguable concern—whether Metricon was improperly treated as an “interested party” rather than a “necessary party” in the original proceedings before the Environment and Land Court.
Metricon Home has maintained that its development complies with all legal and environmental requirements. The developer argued that the application by the residents lacked merit, was filed too late, and that halting construction would cause them significant financial losses.
Metricon further highlighted the potential economic impact of halting the project, stating that the development was not only a valuable investment but also a source of employment for dozens of local workers and contractors. The company argued that suspending construction would disrupt livelihoods and undermine broader government efforts to stimulate economic growth through infrastructure projects.
The Nairobi City County Government, named as the third respondent in the case, supported the legality of the controversial housing project, asserting that all planning and development approvals issued to Metricon were properly granted in accordance with applicable laws.
