[2016] KEHC 4561 (KLR)
The court determined that it would be premature to give directions on which application should be heard first before all parties have completed their responses to the pending applications. The judge further held that hearing oral submissions from the parties would be prudent to assist in deciding the sequence of...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2016] KEHC 4561 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Executor (unnamed); Respondent: Other parties (unnamed)
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Succession Cause Nos1975 & 2129 of 2006
- Procedural Posture
- Succession Cause / Directions on Sequence of Hearing Pending Applications
- Outcome
- Mention date to be given for compliance confirmation and representations; no final orders on applications sequence yet.
- Judges
- DN Musyoka
- Legal Topics
- Probate and Administration, Estate Management, Directions on Applications
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Executor (unnamed)
Applicant
Other parties (unnamed)
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Directions on Sequence of Hearing Pending Applications
Legal Issues
- 1 Which of the pending applications in the succession cause should be heard first.
- 2 Whether directions should be given before parties have completed responding to the applications.
Ratio Decidendi
The court determined that it would be premature to give directions on which application should be heard first before all parties have completed their responses to the pending applications. The judge further held that hearing oral submissions from the parties would be prudent to assist in deciding the sequence of hearing. Accordingly, the matter was set for mention to confirm compliance with previous orders and to allow parties to make representations on which application should be heard first.
Court Disposition
Mention date to be given for compliance confirmation and representations; no final orders on applications sequence yet.
Orders
- Matter to be mentioned to confirm compliance with previous orders.
- Parties to make oral representations on which application should be heard first.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
13 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
SUCCESSION CAUSES NOS. 1975 AND 2129 OF 2015
IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF BERNARD MARTENS (DECEASED)
DIRECTIONS
I had reserved this matter for directions on 10th June 2016, on which of the pending applications should be heard first.
On 7th June 2016 I granted leave to the executor to file a reply to the application dated 19th May 2016. Leave was limited to ten (10) days.
I have considered the position and am of the view that is should not give directions before parties have completed responding to the applications.
I am also persuaded that it may be prudent to hear oral submissions from the parties first before any directions are given on which application is heard first.
The matter shall be given a mention date to confirm compliance with the orders of and to hear representations from the parties on the applications that they believe should be heard first.
DATED, SIGNED and DELIVERED at NAIROBI this 10TH DAY OF JUNE, 2016.
W. MUSYOKA
JUDGE