[2017] KEHC 4451 (KLR)

[2017] KEHC 4451 (KLR)

The court found that the administrators had failed to agree on the mode of distribution of the estate and that the widow and daughter of the deceased were entitled to a share of the estate as surviving dependants. The court applied Section 40(1) of the Law of Succession Act and Article 27 of the Constitution,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] KEHC 4451 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Flora Karimi Mirigo; Respondent: Zaverio Kaburu Kiragu; Respondent: Peter Kaaria Kiragu; Respondent: Lucy Kawira Kiragu
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Meru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Succession Cause 155 of 1992
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Distribution of Estate After Revocation and Appointment of Co Administrator
Outcome
Estate to be shared equally among the four named beneficiaries; costs to be borne equally by administrators.
Legal Topics
Intestate Succession, Distribution of Estate, Revocation of Grant, Beneficiary Entitlement
Source Language
en
Family and Children Civil Procedure Intestate Succession Distribution of Estate Revocation of Grant Beneficiary Entitlement

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Flora Karimi Mirigo

Applicant

Zaverio Kaburu Kiragu

Respondent

Peter Kaaria Kiragu

Respondent

Lucy Kawira Kiragu

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Succession Cause / Ruling on Distribution of Estate After Revocation and Appointment of Co Administrator

  1. 1 Whether the widow and daughter of the deceased were unlawfully excluded from the distribution of the estate.
  2. 2 Whether Zaverio Kaburu Kiragu was a lawful beneficiary and administrator of the estate.
  3. 3 What is the proper mode of distribution of the deceased's estate among the surviving dependants.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the administrators had failed to agree on the mode of distribution of the estate and that the widow and daughter of the deceased were entitled to a share of the estate as surviving dependants. The court applied Section 40(1) of the Law of Succession Act and Article 27 of the Constitution, holding that the estate should be shared equally among all surviving beneficiaries, namely Flora Karimi Mirigo, Lucy Kawira Kiragu, Peter Kaaria Kiragu, and Zaverio Kaburu Kiragu. The court rejected arguments seeking to exclude any of these parties and emphasized the need for equality and finality in the matter, given the protracted nature of the proceedings since 1992.

Court Disposition

Estate to be shared equally among the four named beneficiaries; costs to be borne equally by administrators.

Orders

  • The estate of the deceased shall be shared equally among Flora Karimi Mirigo, Lucy Kawira Kiragu, Peter Kaaria Kiragu, and Zaverio Kaburu Kiragu.
  • The costs of the cause to be borne by the administrators equally.