NAIROBI, Kenya, Jul 28 – Over 9,000 pensioners under the Telposta Pension Scheme face a longer wait in court after a firm contesting the reinstatement of a disputed parcel to the scheme secured the go ahead to move to the Supreme Court. The Court of Appeal granted Intercountries Importers and Exporters Limited permission to challenge its loss of ownership of the contested Nairobi property, estimated at Sh1 billion, following an application over implications of bank charges and the exercise of statutory power of sale.In a ruling delivered on Friday, Appellate Judges Daniel Musinga, Patrick Nyamweya, and George Odunga certified that the company’s intended appeal raises matters of general public importance, paving the way for the protracted land dispute to move to the country’s highest court.“This application meets the test set out in Hermanus Phillipus Steyn v Giovanni Gnecchi-Ruscone and warrants certification,” the three-judge bench held. “The issues… affect or are likely to affect a substantial number of members of the public and in particular those who obtain titles to land as a result of the exercise of statutory powers of sale by financial institutions.”The dispute centers on LR No. 209/13238, which Telposta Pension Scheme claims was irregularly allocated to Park Investments Limited, later charged to Trust Bank, and eventually sold to Intercountries Limited for Sh28 million.Fraudulent title In July 2024, the Court of Appeal overturned a 2018 High Court judgment that had favored Intercountries, finding that the land was not unalienated public property available for allocation, and that the Commissioner of Lands acted irregularly in alienating it. The appellate court further held that Park Investments’ title was fraudulent, rendering the subsequent charge and sale to Intercountries a nullity.Intercountries now wants the Supreme Court to pronounce itself on the scope of statutory protections under Section 99(3) of the Land Act, particularly for purchasers deriving title from a chargee’s exercise of statutory power of sale.Its lawyers also want the apex court to clarify whether provisions of the Land Act can be applied retroactively to transactions governed by repealed statutes such as the Registration of Titles Act.The judges agreed that the questions raised transcend the interests of the litigating parties, affecting the wider public and the banking sector.“Determination by the Supreme Court will clarify the extent to which such a purchaser ought to go in investigating the root of the title,” they ruled.However, the court rejected Intercountries’ plea for a stay of execution of its July 2024 judgment, ruling that it lacked jurisdiction to grant such orders post-judgment.“Once this Court has pronounced the final judgment, it is functus officio and must down its tools,” the judges said, citing the principle of finality of proceedings.