A property investor who alleges that her former lawyer exploited her illness to fraudulently transfer ownership of her Sh45 million house in Nairobi has asked the High Court to overturn the orders that halted the intended prosecution of the lawyer and the property's buyer.

Monica Jackline Wambui has filed submissions urging the Judicial Review Division court to set aside the orders issued to advocate Chege Wainaina and property buyer Lucy Wairimu Mwangi.

She claims that these orders were obtained without her being heard, despite her being the complainant in the proposed criminal case.

The dispute centres on House No. 6 at Casablanca Villas on Dennis Pritt Road in Nairobi's Kilimani area. Court records show that the battle over ownership began in 2009, when Lucy Wairimu Mwangi sued for vacant possession after purchasing the property.

Read: Property owner seeks to lift order blocking lawyer’s prosecution over Sh45m Nairobi villa sale

The High Court ruled in her favour in 2020, after which subsequent appellate proceedings and enforcement applications were followed by fresh civil and criminal proceedings this year.

Mr Wainaina and Ms Mwangi moved to court in June this year after the Directorate of Criminal Investigations' Land Fraud Unit completed investigations and prepared a charge sheet proposing various criminal charges.

These included charges of conspiracy to defraud, forgery, creating false documents, uttering false documents, obtaining land registration by false pretences, and theft relating to the property's transfer.

Investigators allege the offences were committed between 2008 and 2009 during the transfer of the property, which they value at Sh45 million.

However, they argue that the Director of Public Prosecutions, the Inspector General of Police, and the Directorate of Criminal Investigations should be barred from prosecuting them, as the ownership dispute was conclusively determined through earlier civil proceedings.

Justice William Musyoka allowed the judicial review case to proceed and temporarily stopped their planned arraignment before the Milimani Chief Magistrate's Court.

Read: Woman sues lawyer, property buyer over alleged fraud in Nairobi house transfer

He also allowed Ms Wambui to join the proceedings as an interested party.

In her submissions attacking both the stay orders and the judicial review application itself, Ms Wambui argues the orders were issued without hearing parties directly affected by the intended prosecution and asks the court to vacate them.

"The outcome of these Judicial Review proceedings will directly affect her legal rights and the fair administration of justice, without her being afforded a hearing," her advocate stated.

Ms Wambui also accused the applicants of material non-disclosure, stating that they had failed to disclose the complainant as a necessary party when seeking ex parte orders.

"A party approaching the court for an exparte order has a duty to make full disclosure of all material facts within his possession," the advocate added.

Ms Wambui further argues that the judicial review proceedings failed to comply with the Fair Administrative Action Rules, 2024, despite relying on the Fair Administrative Action Act.

She contends that the applicants should instead present their objections before the criminal court.

"All the arguments which the ex parte applicants posit before this court can fully and effectually be presented in full ventilation before the criminal court," the submissions state.

Read: Police gone rogue: Plot to kill Dr Mutiso and officers for hire

She also argues that the existence of civil litigation is not, in itself, a reason to halt criminal proceedings arising from the same facts.

"The concurrent existence of the criminal proceedings and civil proceedings would not constitute an abuse of the process of the court," the submissions state.

The criminal investigation is the latest chapter in a dispute that has generated multiple court battles over the Kilimani maisonette.

Ms Wambui alleges the property was transferred without her authority after she surrendered title documents, passports, bank records and other original personal documents to Mr Wainaina while he represented her in divorce and matrimonial property proceedings.

She also alleges the transaction was procured while she was suffering from mental illness.

Mr Wainaina and Ms Mwangi deny those allegations. They maintain Ms Mwangi lawfully purchased the property for Sh13.7 million and contend the proposed prosecution is an abuse of process.

Read: Rose Mulwa: From divorce battles, governor race to Dr Mutiso murder suspect

The court is now expected to determine whether the interim stay on the intended prosecution should remain in force.

The ruling is scheduled for October 2, 2026.

The ownership battle has since expanded beyond the commercial dispute.

Last month, Ms Wambui filed a fresh Environment and Land Court case seeking cancellation of the transfer and restoration of the property to her name.

Follow our WhatsApp channel for breaking news updates and more stories like this.