[2022] KEHC 16442 (KLR)

[2022] KEHC 16442 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate any discovery of new and important evidence or an error apparent on the face of the record to justify review of the ruling confirming the grant. The applicant, through his advocate, had requested confirmation of the grant as applied, and there was no objection...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KEHC 16442 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Consolata Anyango Ondego; Respondent: Maurice Ochieng Ondego
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Homa Bay
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Probate & Administration 17 of 2016
Procedural Posture
Probate and Administration / Ruling on Application for Review and Stay of Execution
Outcome
application dismissed with costs
Judges
KW Kiarie
Legal Topics
Confirmation of Grant, Distribution of Estate, Review of Court Orders
Source Language
en
Family and Children Confirmation of Grant Distribution of Estate Review of Court Orders

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Consolata Anyango Ondego

Applicant

Maurice Ochieng Ondego

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Probate and Administration / Ruling on Application for Review and Stay of Execution

  1. 1 Whether the applicant demonstrated grounds for review of the ruling confirming the grant of administration intestate.
  2. 2 Whether there was discovery of new and important evidence or an error apparent on the face of the record to warrant review.
  3. 3 Whether the distribution of the estate was conducted in accordance with the law.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate any discovery of new and important evidence or an error apparent on the face of the record to justify review of the ruling confirming the grant. The applicant, through his advocate, had requested confirmation of the grant as applied, and there was no objection at the time. The court held that it was not erroneous for the grant to be confirmed in those circumstances and that the grounds advanced by the applicant did not meet the threshold for review under the Civil Procedure Act and Rules. Consequently, the application lacked merit and was dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The application for review and stay of execution is dismissed with costs.