On 19th September 2025, the Court of Appeal delivered its judgment in Civil Appeal No. E160 of 2025, Claire Kubochi Anami & Others versus CECM Built Environment and Urban Planning, Nairobi City County & 20 Others, a case challenging the legality of approvals for high-rise developments along Rhapta Road. Rhapta Road Residents Association (the appellants) had filed a case in the Environment and Land Court contending that the approvals were issued in a policy vacuum or in disregard of controlling plans and zoning instruments, thereby violating the Constitution.

The appeal before the Court of Appeal sought to determine the legal governance of urban planning in Nairobi. These are the salient features of the judgment: 

1. Governing instruments for planning in Nairobi 

The Court clarified the legal status of key planning documents currently operational in Nairobi County: 

1. The binding legal framework: The ultimate authority for planning rests with the Constitution (particularly Articles 10, 42, and 69) and the Physical and Land Use Planning Act, 2019 (PLUPA). 
2. Obsolete instruments: The 2004 Nairobi City Development Ordinances and Zones ("2004 Zoning Guidelines") are legally obsolete and no longer carry binding legal status under the devolved framework, as the same were passed under the repealed Physical Planning Act. 
3. Strategic policy: The Nairobi Integrated Urban Development Master Plan (NIUPLAN) 2016 is a valid, Assembly-approved county-wide strategy document which articulates spatial structure and provides broad development policy intent. Therefore, it operates as a strategic 'compass' and does not descend to the granularity required to supply parcel-specific zoning rules under Section 46 of PLUPA. 
4. Operative administrative guide: The 2021 Nairobi City Development Control Policy is not a binding legislative instrument because it lacks formal approval and gazettement by the County Assembly. The policy was passed through technical processes, subjected to stakeholder consultations, and internally adopted by the County Executive as the operative framework. Given that the 2004 Zoning Guidelines are obsolete, the 2021 Development Control Policy act as an administrative guiding instrument pending formal approval and gazettement.

2. Zoning classifications for Rhapta Road 

The Court of Appeal allowed the developers' cross-appeal in part, correcting the trial court's misclassification of the Rhapta Road area. 

1. Rhapta Road classification: Rhapta Road and the impugned properties are classified as falling within Zone 3C under the 2021 Nairobi City County Development Control Policy. 
2. Interim height cap: The ELC had determined that Rhapta Road is situated in Zone 4B with a 16-floor cap on developments. Relying on the 2021 Development Control Policy as an administrative guide, the Court of Appeal corrected this position and classified Rhapta Road under Zone 3C with buildings in the zone capped at twenty (20) floors. 

3. Way forward?

To remedy the systemic governance failure resulting from the lack of gazetted and lawful zoning instruments, the Court of Appeal issued a comprehensive structural interdict to be implemented by the Nairobi City County as follows: 

1. Time-table for compliance: The Nairobi City County must, within six (6) months of the judgment date, finalize and approve through the County Assembly, and gazette comprehensive zoning and development control plans for the whole city in conformity with PLUPA 2019. 
2. Interim report: Within three (3) months of the judgment, the County Government must file a progress report detailing steps taken, including public participation forums, preparation of draft bills, regulations or policies and consultations with professional associations such as the Architectural Association of Kenya, Institution of Planners and the Law Society of Kenya. 
3. Final report and supervision: Seven (7) days after the six-month period lapses, the County must file a Final Compliance Report attaching the gazetted instruments a participation report and a capacity-concurrency statement. 

4. Transitional posture - what happens in the meantime?

1. Approvals or environmental licenses already lawfully issued and acted upon shall remain valid; 
2. Pending development applications not yet finalized shall continue to be processed under PLUPA 2019 and its regulations, guided by the 2021 Development Control Policy, pending its formal approval and gazettement.

The case is important as it addresses important legal issues that are increasingly being raised by Residents Association in Nairobi with multiple cases pending in court challenging  the county’s approval of developments. The case now settles the law on nairobi County development Approval processes and will be a critical guide in determining the other cases that are pending before the Environment& Land Court, the National Environment Tribunal and The County Physical and Land Use Planning Liaison Committee.

In issuing the orders above, the court clarified that it is not substituting itself for the County Assembly or the County Executive. In this regard, the Court retains limited supervisory jurisdiction to ensure effective implementation of the orders.