[2021] KEHC 13524 (KLR)
The court found that the respondents, as administrators and trustees of the deceased's estate, were in contempt of the court orders issued on 11th May 2018 by failing to account for the assets sold and the proceeds thereof, as well as failing to provide the required documentation. The excuses advanced by the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEHC 13524 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Harrison Kaguongo Njuguna; Respondent: Esther Wangari Njuguna Kariuki; Respondent: Susan Nyambura Njuguna Kariuki
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Succession Cause 2036 of 2000
- Procedural Posture
- Succession Cause / Ruling on Contempt and Sentencing
- Outcome
- Respondents found guilty of contempt; fines imposed with custodial sentences in default.
- Judges
- AO Muchelule
- Legal Topics
- Contempt of Court, Administration of Estates, Fiduciary Duties, Trust Property, Succession, Court Orders
- 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
Harrison Kaguongo Njuguna
Applicant
Esther Wangari Njuguna Kariuki
Respondent
Susan Nyambura Njuguna Kariuki
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Contempt and Sentencing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the respondents were in contempt of court orders issued on 11th May 2018.
- 2 What punishment should be imposed for the contempt of court by the respondents.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the respondents, as administrators and trustees of the deceased's estate, were in contempt of the court orders issued on 11th May 2018 by failing to account for the assets sold and the proceeds thereof, as well as failing to provide the required documentation. The excuses advanced by the respondents were repetitive and unconvincing, as similar explanations had been previously offered without resulting in compliance. The 1st respondent, in particular, abused her fiduciary position by selling trust property and failing to account to the beneficiary, the applicant. The court emphasized the seriousness of contempt in the context of succession proceedings and the need to...
Court Disposition
Respondents found guilty of contempt; fines imposed with custodial sentences in default.
Orders
- The 1st respondent shall pay a fine of Kshs.200,000/= in default 6 months in jail.
- The 2nd respondent shall pay a fine of Kshs.100,000/= in default 4 months in jail.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
MILIMANI LAW COURTS
FAMILY DIVISION
SUCCESSION CAUSE NO. 2036 OF 2000
IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF JAMES NJUGUNA KARIUKI (DECEASED)
HARRISON KAGUONGO NJUGUNA.............................OBJECTOR
AND
ESTHER WANGARI NJUGUNA KARIUKI..........1ST RESPONDENT
SUSAN NYAMBURA NJUGUNA KARIUKI.........2ND RESPONDENT
RULING
1. On 29th November 2019 this court found the respondents Esther Wangari Njuguna Kariuki and Susan Nyambura Njuguna Kariuki (mother and daughter, respectively) guilty of contempt of the court orders issued by this court on 11th May 2018. The respondents were administrators in the estate of the deceased James Njuguna Kariuki, the 1st respondent’s late husband. The respondents got a confirmed grant in which the 1st respondent was to hold the landed estate of the deceased in trust for herself and for the 2nd respondent and applicant Harrison Kaguongo Njuguna. She sold some of the properties subject of the trust. In the application subject of the orders of 11th May 2018 the respondents were to account for the assets they had sold, and the proceeds thereof and all the documents relating to the sale and transfer. They disobeyed the orders, hence the finding that they were in contempt.
2. I asked the respondent to show cause why they should not be punished for the contempt. Mr. Odhiambo mitigated for them. Counsel stated that his clients were on the verge of complying with the orders; that they had written to court for certified copies of the grant to be able to produce the record of account; that they needed to access the Buruburu House where the applicant who is 1st respondent’s son is staying but that he had locked them out; and that they were on the verge of putting together the records of account.
3. These are the same excuses that the respondents gave during the application.
4. I appreciate that this is a family dispute, the mother and daughter on one side and son on the other. The 1st respondent was in a fiduciary position in relation to the property she held in trust for her son, the applicant. She abused the trust. Both respondents disobeyed orders that the court made.
5. Considering all facts, I order that the 1st respondent shall pay a fine of Kshs.200,000/= in default 6 months in jail. The 2nd respondent shall pay a fine of Kshs.100,000/= in default 4 months in jail. The fines shall be paid within 45 days, failing which each respondent shall be arrested to go and serve her jail term.
6. Each respondent has 28 days to appeal.
DATED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 22ND DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021.
A.O. MUCHELULE
JUDGE