- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
High Court Of Kenya Suspends $736 Million Power Line Deal Between KETRACO And Adani
High Court Of Kenya Suspends $736 Million Power Line Deal Between KETRACO And Adani
The energy ministry said it would help address persistent power blackouts and support economic growth
The High Court of Kenya has suspended a $736 million public-private partnership deal signed recently between the state-owned Kenya Electrical Transmission Company (KETRACO) and India's Adani Energy Solutions to build and operate power infrastructure including transmission lines.
The bench clarified that the government could not proceed with the 30-year agreement with Adani Energy until the court decided on a case by the Law Society of Kenya (LSK) challenging the deal.
The law society had argued that the power deal was "a constitutional sham" and was "tainted with secrecy."
The LSK alleged that KETRACO and Adani Energy did not hold public participation in the project, a requirement under Kenya's Public-Private Partnerships Act, 2021.
Earlier, the energy ministry said it ran a competitive bidding process.
Recently, the Adani Group, founded by Indian billionaire Gautam Adani, sparked anger in Kenya over another proposed public-private partnership project to lease the country's main airport for 30 years in exchange for its expansion.
The LSK and the Kenya Human Rights Commission challenged the proposed airport deal in court. They claimed that it was unaffordable, threatened job losses, and did not offer value for money.