[2025] KEHC 4676 (KLR)
The court held that the applicant failed to establish any specific or legally recognized grounds for recusal as set out in Regulation 21 of the Judicial Service Code of Conduct and Ethics Regulation of 2020. The applicant's allegations were based on dissatisfaction with previous rulings and perceived errors, which...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KEHC 4676 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Chrisantus Juma Wafula; Petitioner: Jaban Wafula Murunga (Deceased); Respondent: Herman O Murunga (Deceased); Respondent: William Wamalwa Wekunda; Respondent: Donald Okumu Sikunyili
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Bungoma
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Succession Cause 64 of 1998
- Procedural Posture
- Succession Cause / Ruling on Application for Recusal of Judge
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- REA Ougo
- Legal Topics
- Judicial Recusal, Judicial Bias, Succession Proceedings
- 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
Chrisantus Juma Wafula
Applicant
Jaban Wafula Murunga (Deceased)
Petitioner
Herman O Murunga (Deceased)
Respondent
William Wamalwa Wekunda
Respondent
Donald Okumu Sikunyili
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Application for Recusal of Judge
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant has established sufficient grounds for the recusal of the presiding judge from the succession proceedings.
- 2 Whether alleged erroneous findings or dissatisfaction with previous rulings constitute a basis for judicial recusal.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the applicant failed to establish any specific or legally recognized grounds for recusal as set out in Regulation 21 of the Judicial Service Code of Conduct and Ethics Regulation of 2020. The applicant's allegations were based on dissatisfaction with previous rulings and perceived errors, which do not amount to judicial bias or any of the enumerated grounds for recusal. The court emphasized that recusal must be based on clear, specific, and substantiated grounds, not on mere disagreement with judicial decisions. The judge affirmed that there was no prejudice against the applicant and that all pending applications would be addressed in due course. Consequently, the...
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application for recusal is dismissed.
- There is no order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
29 paragraphs
In re Estate of Skinyili Lusike Mulia (Decesaed) (Succession Cause 64 of 1998) [2025] KEHC 4676 (KLR) (4 April 2025) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 4676 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Bungoma
Succession Cause 64 of 1998
REA Ougo, J
April 4, 2025
IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF SKINYILI LUSIKE MULIA (DECEASED)
Between
Jaban Wafula Murunga (Deceased)
Petitioner
and
Herman O Murunga (Deceased)
1st Respondent
William Wamalwa Wekunda
2nd Respondent
Donald Okumu Sikunyili
3rd Respondent
and
Chrisantus Juma Wafula
Applicant
Ruling
1. The Applicant, through his application dated 4. 10. 2024, seeks that this court recuse itself on the reasons stated in his supporting affidavit, which he briefly highlighted at the hearing of his application. The application was opposed.
2. I have considered the oral submissions by the parties. This matter has been in court for a long time. The Applicant filed an application and this court gave a ruling. The applicant states that this court is on trespasser of the law. The applicant has failed to explain how this court is a trespasser of the law. From the applicant’s affidavit is apparent that the applicant is unhappy with the orders issued. The applicant has a right to appeal against the said orders.
3. Regulation 21 of the Judicial Service Code of Conduct and Ethics Regulation of 2020 states as follows:1. A judge may recuse himself or herself in any proceedings in which his or her impartiality might reasonably be questioned where the judge— Recusal.(a)Is a party to the proceedings;(b)Was, or is a material witness in the matter in controversy;(c)Has personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceedings;(d)Has actual bias or prejudice concerning a party;(e)Has a personal interest or is in a relationship with a person who has a personal interest in the outcome of the matter;(f)Had previously acted as a counsel for a party in the same matter;(g)Is precluded from hearing the matter on account of any other sufficient(h)Or a member of the judge’s family has economic or other interest in the outcome of the matter in question.(2)Recusal by a judge shall be based on specific grounds to be recorded in writing as part of the proceedings.(3)A judge may not recuse himself or herself if—(a)No other judge can deal with the case; or(b)Because of urgent circumstances, failure to act could lead to a serious miscarriage of justice;
4. In his affidavit, the applicant points out what are erroneous or wrong findings on the ruling delivered and the proceedings in court. As a court, I have guided the applicant every time he has been in court with patience and being firm when necessary. I have no prejudice against the applicant.
5. Any pending application in the matter will be dealt with on a given date. A decision or order made does not necessarily warrant or form the basis of the recusal of a judge.
6. I find no merit in the application. The applicant is at liberty to prosecute his pending application/s and to appeal against any decision this court has made. The applicant has not made out a case for recusal and therefore, I dismiss his application with no order as to costs.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT BUNGOMA THIS 4TH DAY OF APRIL 2025R.E. OUGOJUDGEIn the presence of:Applicant - AbsentBenson Simiyu WafulaWiliam Wamalwa WekundaDonald Okumu SikunyuliWilkister -C/A