Category: Business Daily

Once a deal is signed, a company’s operations must honour its promise and, ideally, exceed it. That is how clients are both acquired and retained. Knowing that, what then does it take to deliver the desired outputs consistently and at scale? The answer lies in three interconnected pillars: people, processes, and systems.

And it starts with people. At the core of operational excellence are people: It is the people who define the culture of an organisation without the right fit, there is no way to achieve your strategic goals.

The right people that are honest with each other and with their clients; have the expertise that will deliver the promise, and are agile and available to do what is right for the organisation whenever called upon, even if it stretches beyond their day to day.

They also understand that accountability is not confined to individual roles, and that everyone has a stake in the customer experience. A culture where employees take ownership and continuously improve is far more likely to deliver consistent results than one that relies solely on talent.

The next pillar is processes. We have all witnessed organisations that have done extremely well when their founder is present. However, as soon as the vision bearer leaves the scene, the organisation fizzles away. The converse are organisations that have been in existence for hundreds of years and transcend all challenges along the way, even when the leadership changes.

Sometimes the changes are so smooth and subtle that the external world hardly notices. Indeed, well-established structures, go a long way in establishing process and more importantly documented process.

Documenting how work is done removes dependence on institutional memory, shortens onboarding for new employees and creates consistency across teams and locations. It also allows for review and the establishment of root causes whenever something goes wrong. Instead of assigning blame, organisations can identify where the process failed and refine it to prevent similar issues in future. Over time, this creates a culture of continuous improvement rather than reactive problem-solving.

The third pillar of operational excellence involves systems. The right systems transform good intentions into measurable outcomes. A leadership team that knows where it wants to go also needs a firm grasp of its data and the ability to analyse it to identify areas of strength, improvement and growth.

The right systems make this visibility possible, enabling proper documentation of processes and empowering people to make the right decisions at the right time. They also automate repetitive tasks, reduce the risk of human error and provide real-time insights that allow leaders to respond quickly when performance begins to drift. The nature of those systems will vary by organisation, but the principle is universal: without them, decisions are made on instinct rather than insight.

Finally, the question for every leader is whether they are intentional enough to build operational excellence. Operational excellence does not happen by accident, nor is it achieved through one-off initiatives. It requires sustained investment in people, disciplined processes and systems that reinforce both.

This is with the clear understanding that operational excellence ultimately translates into a positive customer experience. When organisations consistently deliver on their promises, customers notice. Trust grows, relationships deepen and the business earns the reputation that every sales team hopes to make.

In the modern workplace, a computer or laptop on an employee’s desk may be company property, but the boundaries of what the employer can inspect are increasingly being tested in court.

A recent Employment and Labour Relations Court judgment has held that staff who use employer-owned computers or laptops for personal business cannot automatically claim privacy when the machines are inspected for legitimate work purposes.

The court said the employer may inspect its own computer where there is a legitimate business reason, even if the device contains an employee’s personal emails, private data or business information.

The decision offers a timely warning to workers who mix personal and professional communications-and to employers navigating the line between workplace oversight and employees’ private lives.

The ruling arose from a dispute between Lucy Wacheke, the former Royal Tulip Canaan Nairobi sales account manager, and the hotel and its then-acting general manager.

She was sacked in May 2022 over a double-booking of a hotel conference room, failure to check the events calendar and work emails, and other alleged performance and conduct breaches discovered during an inspection of her work computer.

Ms Wacheke sued through lawyer Morara Omoke claiming she was unfairly and unlawfully dismissed after being verbally sacked by the hotel’s acting general manager during a May 6, 2022 meeting over the double-booking involving a client’s event.

The lawyer argued that she was subjected to harassment, physical assault and violations of her constitutional rights.

Ms Wacheke said the manager summoned her and used abusive and demeaning language, accusing her of mishandling the situation because the guest was unhappy.

She said he then told her, ‘Just know that was a big mistake for a client to complain. Just know you are dismissed. Please get out of here now.’ Ms Wacheke also testified that the manager followed her to her workstation, grabbed her hands and ordered an IT officer to lock her computer.

The hotel said its inspection found unread work emails and incorrect banquet event orders.

It also found that Ms Wacheke had configured the office computer with an Outlook account for Pride East Africa Limited, her personal business.

She admitted using the work computer for private business. She said the arrangement arose during Covid-19 after her salary was cut by half and an IT officer helped transfer data from her personal laptop to the office computer.

The court found that Ms Wacheke was unfairly dismissed, but rejected her claim that inspection of her office computer breached her constitutional right to privacy.

She had worked for the hotel since October 2016 and received a one-year sales account manager contract beginning April 5, 2022, at a gross monthly salary of Sh127,650.

The court found the inspection lawful because it was conducted on the employer’s computer to investigate the booking problem and check use of work systems.

‘The inspection was lawful, proportionate and conducted for a legitimate business purpose,’ the court ruled.

‘Amber light must always start blinking whenever an employee starts to communicate private matters through the employer’s official emails, and/or through official computers,’ it said.

It rejected the claimant’s privacy claim, holding that the employer had not breached Article 31 by inspecting its own equipment.

The court found that the hotel had valid grounds to discipline the employee because she generated the banquet event order without checking the events calendar. She admitted failing to check it during the last two weeks of April.

But the employer lost the case on termination procedure. The court found that the manager dismissed Ms Wacheke on May 6 before the disciplinary process could take place. The subsequent notices for hearings on May 27 and August 25 could not repair that decision.

‘The subsequent show cause letters and disciplinary hearing notices were an attempt to retrospectively sanitise a decision that had already been made,’ the court said.

‘Any attempt to conduct a disciplinary hearing after an employer has already dismissed an employee is a nullity in law,’ it stated.

The case also touched on the handling of workplace evidence. Ms Wacheke told the court that CCTV cameras covered the general manager’s office and could have confirmed what happened during the May 6 internal management meeting about the double-booking.

The hotel produced footage showing her leaving the premises, but did not produce footage from inside the general manager’s office, where the claimant alleged the manager verbally dismissed and harassed her.

The hotel’s human resources manager confirmed that cameras were installed in the general manager’s and sales offices, but said she had only viewed the footage showing Ms Wacheke walking through the basement towards her car.

The court also noted that the hotel did not call the manager, the former HR manager or the IT officer who downloaded the CCTV footage to testify.

The court questioned why the footage covering the events inside the general manager’s office had not been produced and said its omission was prejudicial to the respondents’ case.

‘The workplace should be the epitome of decency and dignity for workers and compliance with fair procedure for separation between the employer and his employee,’ the court said.

It awarded Ms Wacheke a total of Sh1.1 million, comprising Sh255,300 in notice pay, Sh382,950 for unfair termination and Sh500,000 for harassment and violations of her rights to dignity, fair labour practices and fair administrative action.

The court dismissed her claims for Sh1.9 million in commissions, Sh638,250 gratuity, future salary and access to the work computer.

Pension fund returns fell to 18.2 percent in the 12-months to June 2026 from 29.4 percent a year earlier as performance of fixed income securities dipped on lower interest rates and flat bond prices.

Funds administrator Zamara says the average return from fixed income assets eased to 12 percent from 27.3 percent in the 12-months to June 2025, resulting in the lower overall gains despite returns from equities improving to 61.2 percent from 50.3 percent.

The lower returns from bonds reflected both the decline in interest rates on new issuances, and a slower growth in prices of existing bonds in the secondary market, which had seen rapid appreciation in 2024 and 2025.

Rate cuts by the Central Bank of Kenya from August 2024 raised the demand for existing bonds that had been issued at high interest rates, causing their prices in the secondary market to go up. Those holding these bonds, including pension funds, were then able to revalue their market worth upwards on their books.

Bond yields and prices at the secondary market feature an inverse relationship, where a rise in one signals a decline in the other.

‘The year to June 2025 rode the tail end of the CBK’s easing cycle as rates and yields fell sharply, which generated strong capital gains on government paper on top of coupon income. That tailwind happened to reverse in 2026 as inflation rose from 4.4 percent to 6.4 percent between March and June, the CBK paused its rate cuts at 8.75 percent, and yields moved back up,’ said Zamara investment analyst Ken Tobiko.

“The S and P Kenya Sovereign Bond Index actually lost 0.4 percent in the second quarter of 2026 after gaining 5.7 percent in quarter one. So schemes gave back some of the capital gains that had supported last year’s numbers.’

In its survey, Zamara polled 402 schemes with total assets under management of Sh1.508 trillion.

As per latest data from the Retirement Benefits Authority (RBA), pension funds in Kenya hold 74.18 percent of their Sh2.83 trillion assets in fixed income investments, which include government securities (52.14 percent), guaranteed funds (18.59 percent), fixed cash deposits (2.01 percent) and corporate bonds (0.43 percent).

Compared to bonds, equities remain a relatively small investment class in the pensions sector, despite the market enjoying good run of high returns in the last three years.

Equities investments as a percentage of total assets under management stood at 11.13 percent as at December 2025, ahead of immovable property at 8.57percent. The remainder was spread in smaller shares among other classes such as offshore investments, private equity, call deposits and unit trusts.

Pension funds usually maintain a conservative approach to investments, primarily assigning the bulk of their assets under management to risk free government securities.

In the equities market, they largely limit themselves to large, stable companies that provide security for pensioners’ savings while offering annual dividends.

They put in smaller amounts in riskier assets such as private equity and offshore investments, which can offer higher annual returns but are prone to volatility.

RBA regulations on investment caps support this conservative approach, where funds are allowed to place up to 90 percent of their assets under management in government bonds and Treasury bills.

They are allowed to invest up to 70 percent of funds in the equities market, with their actual allocation of just 11.13 percent indicating that they have not rushed to reallocate funds to the riskier equities despite the stock market’s recent good performance.

The investment cap for each of property, fixed deposits and Real Estate Investment Trusts (Reits) stands at 30 percent, that of guaranteed funds at 100 percent, and corporate bonds at 20 percent.

Others such as private equity, unlisted commercial paper, offshore assets and unlisted equities are capped at between five and 15 percent.

With their high cap and allocations, fixed income assets have a significantly larger impact on the overall performance of the funds.

Government securities have over the last two years seen a general decline in interest rates, cutting the income earned from new issuances in the period. Treasury bills average rates dropped to a range of 8.6 to 8.8 percent in June 2026 from highs of 15 to 17 percent in mid-2024.

Bonds have also recorded lower rates on new issuances over the period, with papers issued this year paying annual rates of between 12 and 14 percent, compared to the highs of 16 to 18 percent on bonds issued in 2024.

Similarly, the average monthly interest rate on fixed cash deposits has eased to 6.8 percent from 8.37 percent in June 2025.

Equities have meanwhile been the top performing asset class in the market, boosted by gains on blue chip stocks that helped grow investor wealth at the Nairobi Securities Exchange (NSE) by 56 percent or Sh1.34 trillion in the 12 months to June 2026.

The National Treasury has cut its tax revenue target for the current financial year ending June by Sh81.4 billion, signaling weaker-than-expected collections from corporate and workers’ earnings.

The Treasury expects the Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA) to net Sh2.777 trillion in taxes during the financial year 2026/27 from the Sh2.859 trillion target set in the Budget Policy Statement released earlier.

The estimates were adjusted after taking into account the fiscal outcome of the financial year 2025/26, the Treasury said in its newly published draft 2026 Budget Review and Outlook Paper.

The biggest blow to revenue is expected from income tax, with the Treasury having lowered expected collections by Sh78.6 billion, from Sh1.384 trillion to Sh1.305 trillion.

This makes the income tax streams-largely corporate income tax on profits and Pay as You Earn on wages and salaries– the largest contributor to overall revenue downgrade.

Treasury has already cut Kenya’s 2026 economic growth forecast to 5.0 percent from 5.3 percent, citing the adverse effects of the ongoing Middle East conflict on domestic economic activity.

Officials said earlier growth is expected to recover slightly to 5.1 percent in 2027 as external pressures ease and global supply chains normalise.

The weaker growth outlook helps explain the lower tax projections, particularly reduction in income tax expectations, as Treasury becomes less optimistic about revenue generation during the current financial year.

Treasury officials warned that domestic weather shocks could undermine economic activity and public finances. ‘Adverse weather conditions, including droughts, floods and erratic rainfall, could weaken agricultural production, disrupt food supply and increase inflationary pressures, with implications for household purchasing power and economic activity,’ the draft 2026 BROP says.

The document also warns that external shocks could further strain revenue collection and state finances.

‘A sustained increase in international oil prices could raise domestic fuel and transport costs, widen the import bill and place upward pressure on inflation and the current account,’ Treasury officials wrote, adding that tighter global financial conditions could raise external financing costs, weaken capital inflows and increase exchange rate pressures.

Treasury also lowered Value Added Tax projections by Sh18.9 billion to Sh810.3 billion and excise duty expectations by Sh17.4 billion to Sh364.8 billion.

Other tax revenue was trimmed slightly to Sh76.4 billion from Sh77.4 billion, extending the downward revision across major domestic tax categories.

Import duty is the only major tax source revised upward, with Treasury increasing expected collections by Sh34.6 billion to Sh220.8 billion.

The revision comes after KRA reported in July that manufacturing and energy cemented their position as Kenya’s biggest taxpayers during the year ended June 2026.

KRA said manufacturing, energy, financial and insurance, ICT, and wholesale and retail trade generated about 62 percent of total tax revenue despite accounting for only 27.4 percent of nominal GDP.

The figures underline the government’s dependence on a handful of sectors to finance the Exchequer and suggest that any slowdown in their profitability, investment or employment could significantly affect income tax collections.

Manufacturing remained the largest contributor after paying Sh462 billion, up 9.2 percent from Sh423 billion, while energy generated Sh445 billion after growing 9.1 percent.

Together, manufacturing and energy contributed nearly one-third of all taxes and levies collected by KRA in the year ended June 2026.

“Its contribution is linked to value addition, jobs, supply chains and importation of raw materials, which accounted for 49.0 percent of overall import value,” KRA said of manufacturing. KRA said the energy sector’s performance reflected the strong relationship between oil imports, trade activity and revenue collected at the border.

Financial and insurance firms contributed Sh320 billion, with corporation tax accounting for 34.8 percent of sector collections, while withholding income tax and PAYE jointly contributed 47.1 percent.

ICT generated Sh248 billion from Sh230 billion, supported by excise duty on airtime and financial services, corporation tax, domestic VAT and PAYE.

Wholesale and retail trade contributed Sh288 billion after expanding 10.3 percent, reflecting stronger trade, distribution, consumption and business transactions across the economy.

A few years ago, when fine dining was all the rage in Kenya, foie gras, a luxury delicacy made from the enlarged liver of a duck or goose, was among the exotic dishes that were a must-order.

The buttery-tasting dish was long a symbol of French gastronomy, and hotels were willing to absorb high import costs and endure the painstaking logistics of securing supplies.

But now they have scrapped it from the menu. Reason? Chefs say it failed to whet the appetite of many Kenyan diners and made no economic sense. They cite rising import costs, inconsistent supply and a growing preference for locally sourced foods, which have now been elevated in fine-dining restaurants.

‘The availability and the expense for suppliers to bring it in. It’s expensive, so not many people put it on their menu,’ says

He gives an example of other ingredients such as fresh truffles and French goat cheese.

‘Getting fresh truffles from France and Italy is very difficult. Again, it’s the shelf life. Goat cheese from France would be great to put on your menu, but you can’t sustain it.’

The cost

The chef, one of the pioneers who helped revolutionise fine dining in Kenya, says the decline of foie gras has been gradual.

‘Five years ago, we used to do about three to four kilos a week. Currently, I don’t even think they have it in the market at all. It’s also very expensive to bring in the products,’ he says.

The delicacy used to be imported from France and served as a premium starter, with a single portion retailing at about Sh5,000.

‘We used to serve about 100 grammes with melba toast and cranberry sauce made with wine. We would sear the foie gras lightly, place it on top of the cranberry sauce and serve it with a very thin toast called melba toast,’ he says.

However, unlike other menu items, foie gras required a guaranteed demand to justify the cost of importing and stocking it.

‘Unless you’re using it at a banquet where you’ve already sold it to 50 people, you’re going to lose money,’ he says. ‘But to have it as an à la carte item like we used to do, it will not work for me.’

Chef Athanasius, however, adds that foie gras is still one of the finest ingredients and hotels occasionally consider it for embassy dinners, diplomatic receptions or other high-end private functions where the demand is guaranteed and the cost can be factored into the menu price.

‘The flavour is excellent,’ he says ‘It complements beef fillet, seared duck breast. You can have it as a starter by itself, or with toast and truffles. If you have black truffles, foie gras can be a nice starter in a fine dining restaurant.’

Another reason is that Kenya’s luxury dining market is changing, with diners moving away from the once-fashionable obsession with exotic imported delicacies.

Chef Wayne Walkinshaw, Executive Chef at Radisson Blu, says foie gras arrived in Kenya largely through French culinary traditions that catered to diplomats, expatriates and international travellers.

‘Back in the day, foie gras was seen as a status product. Nowadays, people’s tastes have changed. The local Kenyan market does not see foie gras as a status product,’ he says.

Instead, the diners value authenticity, provenance and freshness.

‘People are looking more at premium-sourced local produce that they can utilise. That’s why I think foie gras is no longer important. It doesn’t carry that status value as it does in Europe,’ he says.

This shift also reflects a broader evolution across the world. Years ago, luxury dining meant serving imported ingredients from countries like Europe regardless of the cost or distance it travelled.

Today, chefs say diners are asking different questions. Where was the food sourced? Is it sustainable? Does it support local producers? Can the chef tell the story behind every ingredient?

Those questions are influencing how chefs create menus.

Acquired taste

Also, taste played a role. Foie gras has a buttery texture and rich flavour, which can be less appealing to diners unfamiliar with it.

‘It’s an acquired taste,’ Chef Walkinshaw says. ‘If you haven’t tasted foie gras, I promise you it’s an acquired taste. I don’t think the Kenyan palate wants that. They want familiar things, especially when it comes to textures and flavours.’

But that does not mean Kenyan diners are unwilling to experiment. In fact, both chefs observe that guests have become increasingly adventurous, but within familiar flavours.

‘They’re venturing into different flavours. But I also find that fine dining is no longer a thing. We’re moving away from that to more rustic and more practical dishes,’ Chef Athanasius.

Sustainability woes

The disappearance of foie gras is also part of a wider sustainability movement sweeping through global restaurants.

Foie gras production has long attracted criticism from animal welfare groups because the ducks and geese are traditionally force-fed to enlarge their livers. Several countries have introduced restrictions on its production or sale, while many luxury hotels and restaurants have removed it from menus.

Chef Athanasius believes health considerations also play a role.

‘It’s also very unhealthy. The ducks are force-fed until the liver becomes very big. So it’s really fatty. I think it’s also going to become illegal very soon because it’s very inhumane to do that.’

He adds that sustainability is becoming part of everyday kitchen operations in international hotel chains.

At Mövenpick, for instance, recipes are assessed using an internal sustainability tool known as Footsteps, which calculates the carbon footprint of each dish and categorises it according to its environmental impact.

‘You put a recipe into Footsteps, and it calculates the carbon footprint. There are different categories. There’s green, and there’s red.’

Ingredients such as beef, seafood and foie gras typically fall within the higher carbon footprint category, helping chefs balance menus as hotels work towards broader sustainability targets.

Local ingredients take centre stage

Instead of exotic ingredients such as foie gras, chefs are now keen on high-quality imported steaks, locally farmed oysters, Kenyan fruits, vegetables and herbs elevated using French and Japanese cooking techniques.

‘Chefs are catering for the local market using local produce that’s locally sourced and elevating it,’ Chef Walkinshaw says.

Even so, consistency is still one of the industry’s biggest challenges.

‘You’ll buy something today, it’s great, and tomorrow it’s not. That’s one of the biggest challenges in Kenya. But if it is local produce, it can be delivered consistently, which makes it a great product.’

While foie gras once occupied the premium starter category, chefs are finding practical alternatives, though they insist that nothing truly replicates it.

‘We can use chicken liver pSté, which can be made in-house, but it’s not that it has replaced foie gras. You cannot replace foie gras. It’s on another level. We try and get as close as possible with chicken liver.’

The Court of Appeal has rejected an application by a company linked to the late tycoon Francis Mburu seeking to place a caveat on the 60-acre parcel of land on Ngong Road, Nairobi, where the newly built Talanta Sports Stadium stands.

A caveat is a warning or notice advising individuals or organisations to consider potential risks or special circumstances before taking action.

A three-judge bench found that Exclusives Estates Limited had failed to demonstrate that its intended appeal would be rendered useless if the orders sought were not granted.

The company, through its director Mark Mungai Mburu, had sought orders restoring a caveat over the property and stopping Telkom Kenya Ltd from seeking payment of Sh11.4 billion, being the portion of the Sh15 billion compensation awarded to the telecommunications company for the compulsory acquisition of the land.

It also wanted the court to order that the Sh11.4 billion be deposited in a joint interest-earning account in the names of the advocates representing the two parties if the government paid the compensation before the appeal was determined.

The Court of Appeal noted the property had already been compulsorily acquired by the Ministry of Sports, Culture and Heritage and that the public project had since been undertaken.

The court said if Exclusives Estates eventually succeeds in its appeal, the consequence would be the reinstatement of its suit for hearing and determination on its merits.

‘Any loss that may ultimately be established is compensable in damages, and the applicant has neither alleged nor demonstrated that the 1st respondent (Telkom Kenya) would be incapable of satisfying any decree that may ultimately issue,’ the judges said.

The court also faulted the company for seeking orders that would affect the Ministry of Sports, Culture and Heritage, yet the ministry was not a party to the proceedings.

‘Granting the relief sought would inevitably affect the rights and obligations of persons or entities who are not before the Court without affording them a hearing,’ the judges said, adding that such orders would effectively reverse actions already undertaken through the compulsory acquisition process.

The application arose from a long-running dispute over the ownership of the land, which was at one time associated with the defunct Kenya Posts and Telecommunications Corporation (KPTC).

Postel Housing Co-operative Society has claimed that KPTC transferred part of the land to it in 1993 for the construction of staff houses after it paid about Sh21 million.

KPTC was dissolved in 1998, resulting in the creation of the Postal Corporation of Kenya, the Communications Authority of Kenya and Telkom Kenya.

Postel later entered into an arrangement with Exclusives Estates to develop residential houses on the property, but the project stalled.

In 2001, Exclusives Estates sued Postel seeking payment for development plans it had prepared. While the case was pending, Postel agreed in January 2009 to assign its interest in the property to Exclusives Estates.

Telkom has disputed that transaction, arguing that the transfer was undertaken without its knowledge or consent.

The dispute was subsequently taken to arbitration, resulting in an award in September 2019 directing Telkom Kenya to hand over the 60-acre parcel to Exclusives Estates.

The High Court later nullified the arbitral award in 2021.

During the litigation, the government moved to acquire the property for a public project.

The National Land Commission published a Gazette Notice in 2017 expressing the government’s intention to compulsorily acquire the land, initially for the establishment of informal Jua Kali operations.

The process, however, stalled, prompting Telkom in 2019 to ask the government to withdraw the acquisition notice.

The dispute resurfaced in 2020 when the Ministry of Sports invited bids for construction of a sports complex on the property, then known as Posta Sports Grounds.

Telkom moved to court and obtained orders stopping construction pending determination of the ownership and compensation dispute.

In December 2020, the court directed that the status quo be maintained, specifically barring further excavation, digging of foundations and trenches, or construction on the land.

Telkom later complained that construction proceeded despite the order, with the contractor setting up a site office and mobilising excavation machinery and other equipment.

The telecommunications company argued that the construction amounted to unlawful deprivation of its property rights under Article 40 of the Constitution because the government had not completed the compulsory acquisition process or paid compensation.

In a 2023 judgment, the Environment and Land Court ruled in favour of Telkom, finding that the government had violated the company’s constitutional right to property by taking over the 60-acre parcel without compensating it.

The judge awarded Telkom Sh15 billion in compensation, to be paid by the Ministry of Sports, and ordered interest at 14 per cent from the date of judgment until payment in full.

The judge also directed Telkom to surrender its certificate of lease to the Chief Land Registrar within 180 days, failing which the title would be cancelled and a new one issued in favour of the Ministry of Sports.

Justice Mboya dismissed petitions filed by Postel Housing Co-operative Society, Aftraco Ltd and Exclusives Estates challenging Telkom’s claim to the property.

The judgment paved the way for the government to proceed with the sports project, which has since culminated in the construction of Talanta Sports Stadium.

The dispute over the packaging and brand identity of two competing sanitary pad products will proceed to full determination after the High Court in Mombasa rejected an attempt by one of the manufacturers to have the case thrown out.

Softcare Kenya Company Limited wanted the case filed by Hilalium and Sons (UR Home) Limited and KOT Group Limited struck out.

The court found that Softcare failed to show that the issues before the Mombasa court were substantially the same as those being handled by the Industrial Property Tribunal or the High Court in Nairobi.

‘I therefore find no merit in Software Kenya Company Limited’s challenge to the Court’s territorial jurisdiction at this stage,’ the court said in a ruling delivered on August 6.

The dispute centres on competing claims over the packaging and industrial designs of “MY GIRL” sanitary pad, with the plaintiffs accusing Softcare of introducing a competing product, whose packaging substantially imitates their registered designs.

Hilalium and Sons and KOT Group filed the case on September 3, 2025, together with an application seeking orders to stop what they described as the unauthorised use of their designs.

The two companies told the court that they are the registered proprietors of Industrial Design Registration Numbers 1794 and 1795, covering the packaging and appearance of their ‘MY GIRL’ sanitary pad product.

They alleged that Softcare later introduced a competing product, whose packaging substantially resembles their registered designs, and asked the court to stop the alleged infringement.

Softcare argued that the dispute should instead be handled by the Industrial Property Tribunal. The company also pointed to existing proceedings before the Tribunal and the High Court in Nairobi involving the parties and related issues.

Softcare argued that allowing the Mombasa case to continue would result in different courts handling related disputes and maintained that the High Court in Mombasa lacked territorial jurisdiction to hear the matter.

However, the judge found that the proceedings before the Tribunal and the Mombasa court were not seeking the same outcome.

The Tribunal case seeks the invalidation and revocation of the plaintiffs’ Industrial Design Registration Numbers 1794 and 1795, while the Mombasa suit seeks declarations of infringement, injunctions, damages and an account of profits.

The judge also held that Softcare’s argument that the plaintiffs should have exhausted other available avenues could not be determined at this stage because doing so would require the court to examine disputed facts and the nature and scope of the other proceedings.

The court further distinguished the Mombasa case from proceedings before the High Court in Nairobi.

Although the disputes arise from competition between the companies in the sanitary products market, the causes of action, rights relied upon, and remedies sought are different.

The Mombasa case concerns alleged infringement of the plaintiffs’ registered industrial designs, while the Nairobi proceedings involve allegations of trademark infringement, passing off and unlawful use of the ‘MY GIRL’ trademark.

The ruling allows the Mombasa case to proceed, leaving the court to determine whether Softcare infringed the plaintiffs’ registered industrial designs.

However, the wider dispute involves competing accusations of copying, with each side claiming that the other has unlawfully adopted packaging features associated with its sanitary pad brand.

Softcare maintains that its brand, which has been in the market for more than 14 years, has developed strong goodwill and consumer recognition through sustained production, advertising and sales.

It says its sanitary pads are identified by purple and blue packaging, scattered white flowers, a blue strip across the pack and an image of a woman on the left, with the word ‘SOFTCARE’ prominently displayed in white.

Softcare alleges that KOT and Hilalium initially marketed ‘MY GIRL’ sanitary pads in pink packaging after launching the product in 2024 but later changed the design to incorporate features similar to those of its products.

It argues that the similarities could confuse consumers and enable its competitors to benefit from the reputation and goodwill it has built over the years.

Softcare further maintains that packaging plays an important role in the sanitary pad business because consumers associate a product’s appearance with its quality and performance.

KOT and Hilalium, however, maintain that they are the registered proprietors of the ‘MY GIRL’ industrial designs and accuse Softcare of copying their protected packaging.

The two companies say they registered the Purple Industrial Design and Sky Blue Industrial Design in December 2024, giving them exclusive rights to the designs.

They allege that Softcare reproduced key features of their packaging, including purple and blue colour blocks, a model positioned on the left, a blue strip through the centre and an illustration of a sanitary pad on the right.

They contend that the similarities undermine their brand identity and could confuse consumers, amounting to infringement of their registered designs.

The two companies are seeking declarations of infringement, permanent injunctions, compensation and an account of profits earned from the alleged use of their designs.

The competing claims have turned the packaging of sanitary pads into the centrepiece of a wider commercial battle over brand identity, consumer recognition and goodwill.

Something significant has been happening around East Africa’s established businesses. Regional and international groups have been acquiring controlling interests or increasing substantial shareholdings. These developments point to changes in ownership across the region and raise questions for the institutions affected and their boards.

An established business offers what takes years to build – licences, customers and distribution networks.

But much of its true value is intangible: local knowledge, relationships, management capability, institutional memory, reputation and trust accumulated over decades. In East Africa, these attributes are not soft extras.

They shape regulatory confidence, loyalty, commitment and execution. They rarely appear separately in a purchase price, but can be costly to lose.

What makes an institution attractive to a new owner can also be vulnerable to dilution during integration.

A larger shareholder can bring capital, technology, products and market access. Common systems can strengthen risk management and regional scale can encourage harmonisation.

Yet some local practices, relationships and judgment calls are not obstacles to remove; they are part of the institution’s value. The board must distinguish integration that strengthens the institution from change that weakens the capabilities that made it valuable.

For directors, formal responsibilities may remain unchanged, but their circumstances can alter considerably. Strategic influence, capital allocation, technology, risk and senior appointments may acquire a group dimension. Decisions may increasingly be made or influenced elsewhere in the group.

Describing this simply as a test of board independence misses the point. The board of a subsidiary cannot behave as though its controlling shareholder were an outsider.

The shareholder has invested capital and brings legitimate strategic interests and capabilities. What matters is independence of thought – understanding the shareholder’s objectives while retaining the capacity to exercise independent judgement about the institution itself.

This becomes especially important where the company remains publicly listed. Minority shareholders remain, as do regulators, employees, customers, suppliers and communities whose relationships are with the institution. The board sits where interests meet.

Leadership presents another challenge. A larger group can create career opportunities elsewhere for strong talent.

Others may become uncertain about their prospects and more receptive to competitors, while some may become less engaged as decisions move elsewhere.

Exposure to a larger organisation can develop leaders and extend its influence. The question is whether talent movement is deliberate or simply happening to the institution. Does the board know which capabilities it cannot afford to lose?

That requires looking beyond the chief executive and executive committee. Critical customer relationships, regulatory knowledge, technology capability and institutional memory often reside deeper in the organisation. This talent may have helped attract the new owner.

New ownership can also create new possibilities. Access to capital can enable new investments, technology can open markets and a wider footprint can change growth ambitions.

The board must therefore ask: What made the institution valuable to the new shareholder, and could integration weaken any of it? Which decisions benefit from group scale, and which require local judgement? What information or contrary views might become less likely to reach the board? What leadership capabilities must remain within the institution? And is the board itself still configured for the institution that is emerging?

An ownership change is more than a transaction to be overseen. It is an inflection point at which the board must decide what should be preserved, what should change and what new possibilities should be pursued.

The Employment and Labour Relations Court has temporarily barred Kenya Railways Corporation (KRC) Managing Director Philip Mainga from running the office, following a legal dispute after a petitioner claimed that his second three-year term expired five months ago.

The court in Kisumu has also barred Mr Mainga from exercising the powers of KRC chief executive officer pending a hearing on the legality of his continued tenure.

The court issued the interim orders after a petitioner, Joan Machuma Nyongesa, sued, challenging Mr Mainga’s continued occupation of the office after his second term expired early this year.

The petition says Mr Mainga was substantively appointed for three years from February 3, 2020, and received another three-year term beginning February 3, 2023. That second term expired on February 2, 2026.

Ms Nyongesa says KRC has nevertheless continued recognising Mr Mainga as managing director and that he continues exercising powers attached to the office of the State Corporation’s managing director.

The court ordered the application served on the respondents for hearing on August 18 and directed the respondents to file replies within three days of service.

The orders restrain Mr Mainga from occupying, representing himself as, or exercising the powers and duties of managing director pending the hearing.

The application also seeks to suspend any arrangement authorising Mr Mainga’s continued occupation after expiry of his last lawful term.

Nyongesa’s case centres on the Government Owned Enterprises Act, 2025, which commenced on December 5, 2025.

She argues that Section 22 fixes a chief executive’s term at three years, with eligibility for one further term. She also relies on paragraph 10(3) of the Fourth Schedule.

Ms Nyongesa says that the provision preserves an existing lawful term but does not create another term or restart the statutory limit.

‘The continued exercise of the powers of the office after the apparent expiry of the second term has occasioned the question raised in the Petition,’ her affidavit states.

She argues that the dispute is urgent because Kenya Railways controls strategic railway infrastructure, public assets, procurement, employment, borrowing, contractual obligations and major infrastructure projects.

‘The office of Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer carries responsibility for procurement, borrowing, investments, strategic contracts, expenditure, public employment and major infrastructure projects,’ the affidavit states.

She says that further decisions could create commitments before the court determines whether Mr Mainga remains lawfully in office.

She says an acting chief executive would allow services, railway safety, staff salaries and existing obligations to continue.

‘The orders sought are carefully framed to protect lawful continuity, public safety, existing obligations and innocent third parties while preventing the disputed authority from creating further irreversible commitments,’ she says.

The respondents include Kenya Railways Corporation, its board, Mainga, the Public Service Commission, the Transport Cabinet Secretary and the Attorney-General.

Among key railway works ongoing under the corporation is the extension of the Naivasha-Kisumu-Malaba Standard Gauge Railway.

The Ministry of Roads and Transport says the Naivasha-Kisumu section will cover 264 kilometres, while the Kisumu-Malaba section will cover 107 kilometres.

The petition specifically cites the ongoing railway projects as a reason for urgency, saying decisions by a person whose tenure is disputed could affect contracts, borrowing and other commitments.

The order remains effective until the August 18 hearing. The court’s order applies pending the hearing, leaving unresolved whether the 2025 Act permits Mr Mainga’s continued tenure after the reported expiry of his second term.

A High Court judge has called on Parliament to enact a law regulating the use of DNA testing, saying that courts are increasingly being forced to resolve paternity disputes without a clear legal framework.

Justice Reuben Nyakundi said DNA profiling has become a recurring feature in disputes involving inheritance, child custody and matrimonial property, making it necessary for lawmakers to establish clear rules on when courts can compel testing and how genetic information should be handled.

He said the proposed legislation should ensure DNA technology is used in a manner that complies with the Constitution while safeguarding the rights to privacy, dignity and bodily integrity.

‘I have in mind the necessity of procedures on DNA profiling recognised by law to ensure that the procedure is just, fair and reasonable,’ Justice Nyakundi said.

The judge said the legislative scheme enacted by Parliament should meet the threshold within the constitutional framework of Article 24 on the limitation of rights.

The judge observed that succession disputes involving contested paternity have become some of the most litigated matters before courts, particularly where children born outside marriage seek recognition as beneficiaries of deceased parents’ estates.

In the judgment, Justice Nyakundi said courts should only order DNA testing after a claimant establishes a prima facie case under Section 107 (1) of the Evidence Act and where the welfare and best interests of the child outweigh competing constitutional rights such as privacy.

Justice Nyakundi made the remarks while hearing a dispute over the estate of Kipyego Kogo Chepkwony, who died without a will in 1994, leaving behind an extensive estate that included land, shares, bank investments and several motor vehicles.

The estate was administered by his widow, Veronica Jepsuge Chepkwony, who obtained letters of administration in 1996. The grant was confirmed in 2017 and the assets distributed among the beneficiaries listed in the succession proceedings.

Years later, Edna Chepkoech Tanui moved to court claiming she had been excluded from the inheritance because she was born out of wedlock.

She told the court that Chepkwony was her biological father and had maintained her through her mother, Rose Tanui. She claimed she was omitted from the succession proceedings after the widow allegedly concealed her existence from the court.

Ms Tanui said she grew up in difficult circumstances, failed to access quality education and now survives in rented accommodation despite the deceased having left behind a substantial estate.

She further alleged that family meetings, some chaired by the local chief, had acknowledged her claim and that the widow had at one point agreed to compensate her with Sh500,000 and two acres of land, an agreement she said was never honoured.

The woman also blamed her former advocate for failing to prosecute an earlier application and argued that crucial evidence was never placed before the court.

The widow opposed the application, arguing that Ms Tanui had not produced any documentary evidence to establish paternity, such as a birth certificate or proof that the deceased had acknowledged her as his child.

She also argued that reopening succession proceedings nearly three decades after the deceased’s death would undermine the principle of finality in litigation since the estate had already been distributed.

The widow further maintained that compelling DNA testing would unjustifiably interfere with the constitutional rights to privacy, dignity and bodily integrity and that the applicant had not established a sufficient factual basis to warrant such an intrusive order.

Justice Nyakundi acknowledged that Kenyan law remains unclear on compulsory DNA testing because there is no specific legislation governing the subject, leaving courts to determine each case individually.

The judge noted that previous decisions have not always been consistent, either in their reasoning or in the circumstances under which DNA tests have been ordered.

‘One cannot miss the level of inconsistency either in the findings or on the basis upon which tests have been ordered,’ he said.

The judge, however, observed that courts have consistently recognised the need to balance the search for truth through scientific evidence against the constitutional rights of those required to undergo testing.

He said the prevailing judicial position is that courts may compel adults to submit to DNA testing where it is necessary to determine paternity and where doing so serves the best interests of a child or resolves a genuine inheritance dispute.

Justice Nyakundi found that Ms Tanui had established sufficient grounds to justify scientific testing despite the competing constitutional interests.

He directed that DNA profiling be conducted within 45 days from the date of the ruling, at either the Government Chemist’s Kisumu office or the Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI) laboratory in Eldoret.

The tests, he said, should be undertaken using DNA samples from the deceased’s acknowledged children to determine whether Ms Tanui is biologically related to them.

The outcome of the DNA analysis will determine whether Ms Tanui qualifies as a beneficiary of the estate and whether the succession proceedings should be revisited.