New York court dismisses Ksh.220M case against Kenyan businessman Julius Mwale

Kenyan tycoon Julius Mwale has secured a major legal victory after a U.S. federal court in the Southern District of New York recorded a voluntary dismissal of a Ksh.220 million ($1.5 million) case against him and his wife, Kaila Mwale.

The plaintiffs, Mathew and Brooke Shaw, withdrew the case on May 23, 2025—just 11 days after the same case was closed by a Utah court and transferred to New York.

In her May 12 ruling, U.S. District Judge Ann Marie McIff Allen stated, “The motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, or in the alternative to transfer venue, is granted in part.”

The Shaws had filed the suit in July 2024, claiming they loaned Mwale funds in 2022 for a project in the Democratic Republic of Congo. They also alleged misrepresentations involving the $2 billion Mwale Medical and Technology City (MMTC) in Kenya.

Mwale’s attorneys, Jennifer Tomchak and Nicole Skolout, successfully argued that the case violated a contractual clause designating New York as the exclusive litigation venue.

The court agreed and moved the case accordingly. In a surprising turn, the Shaws themselves acknowledged the contract's terms and agreed to the transfer.

“In Plaintiffs’ memorandum, they consent to transferring the venue to the Southern District of New York,” wrote Judge Allen. Just 11 days after the transfer, the Shaws voluntarily dismissed the case.

Speaking on behalf of Mwale, a representative said, “Justice has been served. We knew the case was frivolous and malicious, as the claims had already been resolved with legal counsel over a year ago.”

Documents submitted in Utah revealed that in April 2023, the parties entered into a loan modification and release agreement, negotiated by experienced counsel on both sides. The agreement included a clause barring future legal action on the same matter.

“The Shaws release and forever discharge the Mwales from any and all claims,” attorney Nicole Skolout wrote. The agreement also stated that any party filing a future complaint would forfeit the right to damages.

“Pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A), plaintiffs... hereby give notice that the action is voluntarily dismissed,” read the court notice filed in New York.