[2020] KEHC 4988 (KLR)
The court held that since the deceased died testate and both executors named in the will remain in office without renunciation, it is their legal duty to administer the estate. Granting letters of administration ad colligenda bona would duplicate the role of the executors and create confusion. Section 67 of the Law...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] KEHC 4988 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Eunice Wanjiru Kaigai; Respondent: Saul Glenie
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Succession Cause 28 of 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Succession Cause / Ruling on Application for Letters of Administration Ad Colligenda Bona
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- A Ali-Aroni
- Legal Topics
- Succession, Testate Estate, Letters of Administration, Executor Duties
- 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
Eunice Wanjiru Kaigai
Applicant
Saul Glenie
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Application for Letters of Administration Ad Colligenda Bona
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether letters of administration ad colligenda bona can be granted where executors named in the will have not renounced their position.
- 2 Whether Section 67 of the Law of Succession Act applies when Section 80 is operational.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that since the deceased died testate and both executors named in the will remain in office without renunciation, it is their legal duty to administer the estate. Granting letters of administration ad colligenda bona would duplicate the role of the executors and create confusion. Section 67 of the Law of Succession Act cannot operate concurrently with Section 80, which governs the duties of executors in a testate estate. Therefore, the application for letters of administration ad colligenda bona was dismissed as misconceived.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application dated 13th January, 2020 is dismissed.
- Each party to bear his/her own costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
19 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NAIROBI
FAMILY DIVISION
SUCCESSION CAUSE NO. 28 OF 2020
IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF THE LATE WALTER ROBERT GLENIE (DECEASED)
EUNICE WANJIRU KAIGAI.............APPLICANT
R U L I N G
1. The Applicant Eunice Wanjiru Kaigai petitioned for letters of administrationad colligenda Bonaunder Section 67 of the Law of Succession Act, on the 13th of January, 2020.
2. In the petition she described herself as a co-executor of the deceased will. She went further to state that the reason for the application is because she needed funds for school fees, and mortgage. She required the expenses stated be paid from the deceased bonus from KULAL INTERNATIONAL LIMITED and QPHARM LIMITED.
3. In her supporting affidavit, the applicant indicated that the deceased died testate, however she is unable to access the legacies left behind as she has been sidelined, lacked information and the current directors of the companies named above seem to have lost interest in the companies to the detriment of the estate.
4. The application was however opposed by one Saul Glenie who described himself as a co-executor of the Will of the deceased for the sole reason that the deceased died testate and there has been no renunciation by the executors of his will.
5. The deceased in his will appointed the applicant and the opposer as the executors of his will and so far none has relinquished their position. In law it is their duty inter alia to collecting, preserve and eventually distribute the estate as per the will and of course deal with all matter’s incidental thereto.
6. To appoint an administrator albeit temporarily will duplicate the duty of administration of the estate and create confusion in this regard and I do agree with Mr. Gichuka, for the objector herein that where Section 80of theLaw of Succession Act is applicable Section 67has no place, they certainly cannot be operational concurrently. In this regard therefore the objection is upheld.
7. Consequently, the application dated 13th January, 2020 be and is hereby dismissed.
8. Each party to bear his/her own costs.
DATED and DELIVERED in NAIROBI on this 27th day of May, 2020.
ALI-ARONI
JUDGE