[2015] KEHC 2521 (KLR)

[2015] KEHC 2521 (KLR)

The court held that the plaintiff's claim for division of matrimonial property is not maintainable because the marriage between the parties is still subsisting and there is no evidence of divorce or separation. Both the repealed Married Women Property Act, 1882, and the Matrimonial Property Act, 2013, require that...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2015] KEHC 2521 (KLR)
Parties
Plaintiff: Dolphine Aidekete Wanyama; Defendant: Shadrack Masika Wepukhuru
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kitale
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Land Case 7 of 2013
Procedural Posture
Originating Summons / Judgment
Outcome
plaintiff's claim dismissed
Judges
EO Obaga
Legal Topics
Matrimonial Property, Division of Property, Polygamous Marriage, Contribution to Property, Injunctions, Jurisdiction
Source Language
en
Family and Children Land and Property Matrimonial Property Division of Property Polygamous Marriage Contribution to Property Injunctions Jurisdiction

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dolphine Aidekete Wanyama

Plaintiff

Shadrack Masika Wepukhuru

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Originating Summons / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff, as a wife in a subsisting marriage, can claim division of matrimonial property under Section 17 of the Married Women Property Act, 1882.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to 0.526 hectares of the suit land by virtue of her marriage to the defendant.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff should be declared owner of 0.526 hectares of the suit land and registered as such.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the plaintiff's claim for division of matrimonial property is not maintainable because the marriage between the parties is still subsisting and there is no evidence of divorce or separation. Both the repealed Married Women Property Act, 1882, and the Matrimonial Property Act, 2013, require that division of matrimonial property can only be claimed after dissolution of marriage. Furthermore, the plaintiff failed to demonstrate any contribution to the acquisition of the suit property. The court also noted the polygamous nature of the marriage and the existence of other wives, making it inequitable to grant the plaintiff half of the property. Accordingly, the claim was...

Court Disposition

plaintiff's claim dismissed

Orders

  • The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
  • There is no order as to costs.