[2019] KEHC 5405 (KLR)
The court held that denying the 1st Interested Party an opportunity to be heard would be prejudicial, as she may be affected by the court's orders. The closure of the case was deemed a procedural technicality that should not override the need for substantive justice. The court relied on Article 159(2)(d) of the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEHC 5405 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Jane Wanjira Muchira; Respondent: Livingstone Ngure Muchira; Interested Party: Teresia Wanjiku Gichobi; Interested Party: Jane Wandia Gakuya
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kerugoya
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Succession Cause 40 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Succession Cause / Ruling on Application to Allow Interested Party to Be Heard
- Outcome
- application allowed
- Judges
- LW Gitari
- Legal Topics
- Succession, Right to Be Heard, Distribution of Estate
- 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
Jane Wanjira Muchira
Applicant
Livingstone Ngure Muchira
Respondent
Teresia Wanjiku Gichobi
Interested Party
Jane Wandia Gakuya
Interested Party
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Application to Allow Interested Party to Be Heard
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the 1st Interested Party should be allowed to be heard despite the case having been closed.
- 2 Whether denying the interested party an opportunity to be heard would cause prejudice.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that denying the 1st Interested Party an opportunity to be heard would be prejudicial, as she may be affected by the court's orders. The closure of the case was deemed a procedural technicality that should not override the need for substantive justice. The court relied on Article 159(2)(d) of the Constitution and Sections 1A and 1B of the Civil Procedure Act to justify setting aside procedural barriers in favor of hearing all parties. The application was therefore allowed, and the 1st Interested Party was granted leave to be heard, with directions for service and response timelines.
Court Disposition
application allowed
Orders
- The 1st Interested Party be served within 21 days.
- The 1st Interested Party to file a response within 14 days after service.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KERUGOYA
SUCCESSION CAUSE NO. 40 OF 2013
IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF LEONARD MUCHIRA NGARE (DCD)
JANE WANJIRA MUCHIRA.............................................PETITIONER
V E R S U S
LIVINGSTONE NGURE MUCHIRA..............................RESPONDENT
AND
TERESIA WANJIKU GICHOBI.................1ST INTERESTED PARTY
JANE WANDIA GAKUYA..........................2ND INTERESTED PARTY
RULING
1. I have considered the application. I find that the application is merited. One party who is an interested party will suffer prejudice as she may be affected by an order of this court without having been given an opportunity to be heard. There will be no prejudice to the respondents as they will be given an opportunity to cross-examine. This is a succession matter where issues of the parties and beneficiaries as well as distribution of the estate are very important ad must be heard and determined once and for all. The issue that the case has been closed is a procedural technicality which should not bar the court from hearing substantial justice. This is the spirit of Article 159(2)(d) of the Constitution and Section 1A & 1B of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. I will therefore allow the application. The 1st Interested party be served within 21 days. He will be given 14 days to file a response and matter be mentioned later for directions.
Dated at Kerugoya this 24th day of July 2019.
L.W. GITARI
JUDGE
Read out in open court,
M/s Nyangati holding brief for Maina for Petitioner.
M/s Kiragu holding brief for 1st protestor.
Petitioner – present.
L. W. GITARI
JUDGE