Senior Counsel Paul Muite and members of his family have demanded more than KSh3 million from Kenya Airways after a cancelled flight from Zanzibar to Nairobi left them stranded at the airport for about seven and a half hours and ultimately forced them to charter a private aircraft home.
The dispute stems from Flight KQ491, which was scheduled to depart Abeid Amani Karume International Airport in Zanzibar at about 10:10am on August 31, 2026. Muite was travelling with his wife, two daughters and two grandchildren after an 11-day holiday in Zanzibar. According to a demand letter dated September 7 and reported by several Kenyan news outlets, the family says the airline mishandled both the flight cancellation and communication with passengers.
How the ordeal unfolded
The family says it was aware that industrial action by aviation workers was disrupting flights in Kenya. They therefore monitored Kenya Airways’ website and mobile application between approximately 5am and 6:30am on August 31.
According to their lawyers, KQ491 was still displayed as “Scheduled” and “On Time”.
The family subsequently arrived at the Zanzibar airport at around 8:10am. They say Kenya Airways representatives confirmed that the flight was operating, after which they checked in their luggage, received boarding passes and cleared immigration.
The situation changed at approximately 10am, when the airport information board reportedly changed the flight’s status to “Delayed”.
The family’s lawyers allege that passengers were not given adequate information about the reason for the delay or how long they would have to wait. More significantly, they claim the aircraft that was supposed to operate KQ491 had not even left Jomo Kenyatta International Airport in Nairobi.
KQ491 was linked to the inbound KQ490 service from Nairobi. The lawyers have questioned why passengers in Zanzibar were allowed to complete check-in and immigration procedures when the aircraft expected to operate their flight had allegedly remained in Nairobi.
The passengers reportedly waited until around 3:45pm before being informed by a Zanzibar airport employee that the flight had been cancelled.
The family’s lawyers say the cancellation was not communicated directly by a Kenya Airways representative. They further allege that passengers were told that accommodation and food vouchers would not be provided and were instead instructed to collect their luggage and await further communication.
Among the passengers was a three-year-old child. The lawyers claim the family spent approximately seven and a half hours waiting without basic assistance, including drinking water.
The private charter that cost millions
With no immediate alternative travel arrangement, Muite and his family decided to charter an aircraft to Nairobi.
The charter reportedly cost US$20,500, approximately KSh2.65 million, while the family incurred another KSh52,650 in related expenses.
The family had originally paid KSh596,450 for its return Kenya Airways tickets. Its lawyers are seeking a 50 per cent refund KSh298,225 for the unused return journey.
That means the identifiable expenses being claimed already exceed KSh3 million when the charter, associated expenses and ticket refund are combined. The lawyers are also seeking general damages for alleged inconvenience, distress and disruption.
Muite also says the disruption had professional consequences. Because he arrived in Nairobi a day later than planned, he allegedly missed meetings that had been scheduled for August 31.
His lawyers have given Kenya Airways seven days to accept liability and settle the claim. Failure to do so, they say, could lead to legal proceedings seeking recovery of the money, damages, interest and legal costs.
The wider aviation crisis
The incident occurred during a major disruption to Kenya’s aviation sector.
Aviation workers’ industrial action began at Kenya’s Jomo Kenyatta International Airport on August 30 and continued into August 31, causing widespread delays and cancellations. The workers’ grievances included concerns about employment practices, compensation and proposed changes affecting the management of JKIA.
Kenya Airways acknowledged the disruption at the time, warning passengers that delays had exceeded six hours and that the resulting backlog had forced the airline to reschedule and cancel some flights. The carrier advised travellers to confirm that their flights were operating before travelling to the airport.
The airline subsequently announced that operations had returned to normal after the industrial action was called off. It also offered affected passengers options to rebook or seek refunds, subject to the conditions of its disruption policy.
This wider context could become important if Muite’s demand develops into litigation. The family is not simply challenging the fact that its flight was cancelled; its complaint focuses heavily on what it describes as inadequate communication and assistance after the disruption became apparent.
What happens next?
Kenya Airways’ response will be closely watched.
The airline’s conditions of carriage state that, where the Montreal Convention applies, its liability for passenger delay is subject to the Convention’s limits. The airline also has specific provisions governing refunds and liability for delays.
However, whether those provisions ultimately determine the Muite family’s claim would depend on the precise circumstances, the applicable law and the evidence surrounding the cancellation and the airline’s response.
For now, the allegations remain claims made by Muite and his legal representatives, rather than findings by a court.
What makes the dispute notable is the extraordinary scale of the expense incurred by passengers following a cancelled commercial flight. A journey that began with a return ticket costing KSh596,450 ended with a private charter costing about KSh2.65 million.
The case therefore raises a broader question for Kenya’s aviation industry: when extraordinary disruptions occur, how quickly should airlines communicate with passengers, what assistance should they provide, and where should responsibility lie when travellers are forced to find and pay for their own way home?
Kenya Airways’ response to Muite’s seven-day demand will determine whether the dispute ends with a settlement or becomes a larger legal test of passenger rights during major aviation disruptions.
