[2008] KEHC 103 (KLR)

[2008] KEHC 103 (KLR)

The court determined that the application for a limited grant for substitution was properly brought under section 67(1) of the Law of Succession Act and Rule 36 of the Probate and Administration Rules, which expressly provide for such grants for specific purposes. The court rejected the respondent's procedural...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2008] KEHC 103 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Agustino Muthuri M'Ibuuri; Respondent: Peter Kirimi M'Ibuuri
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Meru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Succession Cause 93 of 1999
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Application for Limited Grant and Substitution
Outcome
application allowed
Judges
SP Ouko
Legal Topics
Succession Proceedings, Limited Grant of Letters, Substitution of Parties
Source Language
en
Family and Children Succession Proceedings Limited Grant of Letters Substitution of Parties

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Agustino Muthuri M'Ibuuri

Applicant

Peter Kirimi M'Ibuuri

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Succession Cause / Ruling on Application for Limited Grant and Substitution

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to a limited grant for the purpose of substitution in place of the deceased petitioner.
  2. 2 Whether the application for limited grant can be properly filed within the main succession cause rather than as a miscellaneous application.

Ratio Decidendi

The court determined that the application for a limited grant for substitution was properly brought under section 67(1) of the Law of Succession Act and Rule 36 of the Probate and Administration Rules, which expressly provide for such grants for specific purposes. The court rejected the respondent's procedural objection, finding that sections 63 and 64 of the Act were inapplicable to the present application. The court further held that, while the practice is to file miscellaneous applications separately, this is not mandatory where the main suit is a succession cause. Exercising its discretion under Rule 73, the court found that granting the application would not prejudice the objector...

Court Disposition

application allowed

Orders

  • A grant limited to the applicant being substituted in place of the deceased petitioner in this cause is granted.
  • Costs in the cause.