[2024] KEHC 13380 (KLR)

[2024] KEHC 13380 (KLR)

The court held that the power to rectify a grant under section 74 of the Law of Succession Act and Rule 43(1) of the Probate and Administration Rules is strictly limited to correcting errors in names, descriptions, or the time and place of the deceased's death. The substitution of a deceased beneficiary with another...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] KEHC 13380 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Loice Bitengo Chepkwony; Respondent: Willy Kipchirchir Ngeno
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kericho
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Succession Cause 3 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Summons for Rectification of Grant
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
JK Sergon
Legal Topics
Rectification of Grant, Substitution of Beneficiary, Probate and Administration, Law of Succession Act, Confirmation of Grant
Source Language
en
Family and Children Rectification of Grant Substitution of Beneficiary Probate and Administration Law of Succession Act Confirmation of Grant

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Loice Bitengo Chepkwony

Applicant

Willy Kipchirchir Ngeno

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Succession Cause / Ruling on Summons for Rectification of Grant

  1. 1 Whether the court can rectify a confirmed grant to substitute a deceased beneficiary with another person under section 74 of the Law of Succession Act and Rule 43(1) of the Probate and Administration Rules.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the power to rectify a grant under section 74 of the Law of Succession Act and Rule 43(1) of the Probate and Administration Rules is strictly limited to correcting errors in names, descriptions, or the time and place of the deceased's death. The substitution of a deceased beneficiary with another person is a substantive alteration that falls outside the scope of rectification as envisaged by the law. Such substantive changes must be pursued through an application for review or by way of appeal, not by rectification. The court, having confirmed the grant, is functus officio regarding substantive amendments. Accordingly, the application for rectification was dismissed.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The summons for rectification of grant dated 21st February, 2024 is dismissed.
  • No orders as to costs.