[2019] KEHC 9915 (KLR)

[2019] KEHC 9915 (KLR)

The court found that the limited grant ad litem was initially issued in relation to a non-existent suit (HCCA No. 25 of 2001) instead of the correct suit (LDT No. 5 of 2001), which is still pending. The deceased is a party in the latter suit and is not represented, and the suit concerns estate property that needs to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEHC 9915 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Charles Kaburia Kiunga
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Meru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Miscellaneous Succession Cause 25 of 2014
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Succession Cause / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Dismissal and Rectify Limited Grant
Outcome
Application allowed; dismissal order set aside; limited grant rectified.
Judges
F Gikonyo
Legal Topics
Limited Grant Ad Litem, Rectification of Grant, Estate Administration, Representation of Deceased, Succession Procedure
Source Language
en
Civil Procedure Family and Children Limited Grant Ad Litem Rectification of Grant Estate Administration Representation of Deceased Succession Procedure

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Charles Kaburia Kiunga

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Succession Cause / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Dismissal and Rectify Limited Grant

  1. 1 Whether the court should set aside its previous order dismissing the application for rectification of the limited grant ad litem.
  2. 2 Whether the limited grant ad litem can be rectified to reflect the correct suit for which representation is required.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the limited grant ad litem was initially issued in relation to a non-existent suit (HCCA No. 25 of 2001) instead of the correct suit (LDT No. 5 of 2001), which is still pending. The deceased is a party in the latter suit and is not represented, and the suit concerns estate property that needs to be collected and preserved. The court held that, under Section 74 of the Law of Succession Act, it has the power to rectify errors in the purpose of a limited grant. Given the urgency and the need to protect the estate, the court exercised its discretion to set aside the dismissal order and allow rectification of the limited grant ad litem to reflect the correct suit for which...

Court Disposition

Application allowed; dismissal order set aside; limited grant rectified.

Orders

  • The order dismissing the application for rectification of the limited grant ad litem dated 5th March 2018 is set aside.
  • The limited grant ad litem issued on 17th February 2014 is rectified and amended to reflect that it is issued for the purpose of representing the deceased in LDT No. 5 of 2001 in the Chief Magistrate Court at Meru.