[2015] KEHC 3315 (KLR)

[2015] KEHC 3315 (KLR)

The court held that it would be unjust to determine the application dated 5th October 2003 without the affidavits referred to by the respondent, or at least without giving the respondent an opportunity to produce them if they had indeed been filed. The absence of these affidavits from the court record means that the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2015] KEHC 3315 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Catherine Mutinda Nzomo; Respondent: Rose Mwikali Ndisya
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Succession Cause 911 of 2003
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Interlocutory Ruling
Outcome
determination_deferred
Judges
DN Musyoka
Legal Topics
Succession Proceedings, Missing Affidavits, Probate Process
Source Language
en
Family and Children Succession Proceedings Missing Affidavits Probate Process

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Catherine Mutinda Nzomo

Applicant

Rose Mwikali Ndisya

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Succession Cause / Interlocutory Ruling

  1. 1 Whether the application dated 5th October 2003 can be determined in the absence of certain affidavits allegedly filed by the respondent.
  2. 2 Whether justice requires affording the respondent an opportunity to avail the missing affidavits before determination.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that it would be unjust to determine the application dated 5th October 2003 without the affidavits referred to by the respondent, or at least without giving the respondent an opportunity to produce them if they had indeed been filed. The absence of these affidavits from the court record means that the court does not have all the material evidence necessary for a fair determination. Therefore, the court deferred the determination of the application and directed that the matter be mentioned for further directions, ensuring that both parties have a fair opportunity to present their evidence.

Court Disposition

determination_deferred

Orders

  • The matter shall be mentioned on a date to be given at the delivery of the ruling for further directions.