A legal dispute over prime waterfront land in Tudor Creek, Mombasa, may soon hit taxpayers’ wallets after a court ordered state agencies to pay Tudor Creek Limited over Sh400 million.
The contested parcel, just over two hectares along the Port Reitz oceanfront, was initially earmarked for acquisition under the Mombasa Port Area Development Project, designed to expand transport and port infrastructure.
The conflict began when the National Land Commission (NLC) issued notices intending to acquire the land but referenced the wrong parcel in the Gazette Notices.
Tudor Creek Limited clarified that the correct parcel was MN/VI/4158. Court documents detail: “It is the Complainant’s (Tudor Creek) case that NLC gazetted its intention to acquire the suit property on January 9, 2015, through Gazette Notice No. 149 of 2015, later issuing a correction on April 24, 2015, through Gazette Notice No. 2740 of 2015.” The company also pointed out the Gazette incorrectly identified the mother title as MN/VI/2480 instead of MN/VI/2430.
Tudor Creek’s director, Abid Mahmud Alam, confirmed in an affidavit that MN/VI/4158 was the correct parcel.
Despite challenges from the Mombasa County Government, the NLC upheld Tudor Creek’s ownership. An award letter dated October 6, 2016, valued 1.5124 hectares of the land at Sh171,908,458, but the company claims compensation was never paid.
Meanwhile, the Kenya Ports Authority (KPA) continued with development, reclaiming the ocean frontage for port and railway expansion.
This led to the loss of about 258 metres of oceanfront, described in court as the “sole of the boot,” the most strategic section of the property.
The judgment noted: “As a result, the Complainant lost its 258-metre ocean boundary and the strategic attributes of the property and the residual land, constituting less than half the parcel, was rendered commercially unviable and unsuitable for the planned sugar refinery plant.”
Tudor Creek argued that the partial acquisition deprived it not just of land but of its economic and strategic value. The NLC countered that the remaining 1.47 hectares was substantial and commercially viable.
It emphasized that compulsory acquisition applies only to parcels requested for public purposes and dismissed claims that the residual land was unusable or needed for the sugar refinery.
The commission argued: “They asserted that compensation should be limited to the portion actually acquired, together with any losses caused by injurious affection, rather than extending to the entire parcel.”
KPA supported this view, denying responsibility for acquiring Tudor Creek’s land and highlighting that it is not the acquiring authority under the Land Act.
The authority also challenged the validity of the company’s valuation and the proposed sugar refinery plan, insisting that lawful compensation could only arise from an official NLC award.
Court records show KPA had occupied parts of the land since 2012, years before formal acquisition notices. Tudor Creek claimed this prolonged occupation hindered its business activities.
The tribunal considered the value of the acquired land, the lost ocean frontage, and injurious affection on the remaining property.
Valuations by Kenval Realtors put compensation for the 0.628 hectares directly and indirectly acquired at Sh70,218,950, with a 15% disturbance allowance raising it to Sh80,751,792.50.
Additional compensation for injurious affection amounted to Sh81,631,000. Trespass damages for KPA’s occupation since 2012 were set at Sh20,000,000 annually, with aggravated damages of Sh5,000,000.
In total, Tudor Creek stands to receive over Sh400 million.
“An order be and is hereby issued directing the 4th Respondent to, within 45 days of this judgment, pay the Complainant the sums assessed in respect of acquisition, injurious affection, interest, general damages for trespass, and aggravated damages," the tribunal ordered.
Given that KPA is funded by public revenue, the ruling raises the possibility that taxpayers could ultimately cover the hefty payout.
