[2013] KEHC 3675 (KLR)

[2013] KEHC 3675 (KLR)

The court held that the omission of assets from the certificate of confirmation of grant was not an error made by the court but by the administrator. Section 74 of the Law of Succession Act and Rule 43 of the Probate and Administration Rules only permit rectification of grants in cases of errors relating to names, descriptions, or the time and place of death, not for substantive omissions of assets by the administrator. Therefore, the court lacks jurisdiction to rectify the grant in the manner sought. The proper remedy is for the administrator to apply for cancellation of the certificate of confirmation and seek a new confirmation that includes the omitted assets.

Citation
[2013] KEHC 3675 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Applicant (Name not provided); Respondent: (No respondent named)
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
10 May 2013
Case Number
Succession Cause 1223 of 2007
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Application for Rectification of Grant
Outcome
Application dismissed.
Judges
DN Musyoka
Legal Topics
Rectification of Grant, Omission of Assets, Law of Succession Act, Probate and Administration Rules
Source Language
English
Family and Children Rectification of Grant Omission of Assets Law of Succession Act Probate and Administration Rules

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Applicant (Name not provided)

Applicant

(No respondent named)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Succession Cause / Ruling on Application for Rectification of Grant

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court can rectify a grant to include assets omitted by the administrator and not by court error.
  2. 2 Whether Section 74 of the Law of Succession Act and Rule 43 of the Probate and Administration Rules allow rectification for omission of assets by the administrator.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the omission of assets from the certificate of confirmation of grant was not an error made by the court but by the administrator. Section 74 of the Law of Succession Act and Rule 43 of the Probate and Administration Rules only permit rectification of grants in cases of errors relating to names, descriptions, or the time and place of death, not for substantive omissions of assets by the administrator. Therefore, the court lacks jurisdiction to rectify the grant in the manner sought. The proper remedy is for the administrator to apply for cancellation of the certificate of confirmation and seek a new confirmation that includes the omitted assets.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed.

Orders

  • The application dated 8th June 2012 is dismissed with no orders as to costs.