[2014] KEHC 7591 (KLR)
The court found that the proposals by the Public Trustee for the distribution of the estate were largely equitable, noting that exact equality in distribution is not always feasible due to the need to consider the relative value of the portions allocated. The court was satisfied that the rectification to include...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2014] KEHC 7591 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Joseph Gitangu Kibathi; Respondent: Public Trustee
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Succession Cause 378 of 1980
- Procedural Posture
- Succession Cause / Ruling on Summons for Rectification
- Outcome
- application allowed
- Judges
- DN Musyoka
- Legal Topics
- Rectification of Grant, Distribution of Estate, Beneficiary Entitlement
- 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
Joseph Gitangu Kibathi
Applicant
Public Trustee
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Summons for Rectification
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the rectification of the grant to include Joseph Gitangu Kibathi as a beneficiary is justified.
- 2 Whether the proposed distribution by the Public Trustee is equitable.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the proposals by the Public Trustee for the distribution of the estate were largely equitable, noting that exact equality in distribution is not always feasible due to the need to consider the relative value of the portions allocated. The court was satisfied that the rectification to include Joseph Gitangu Kibathi as a beneficiary and to allocate him property from the estate was justified and in accordance with previous court orders. The application for rectification was therefore allowed in the terms proposed by the Public Trustee.
Court Disposition
application allowed
Orders
- The application dated 30th August 2011 for rectification is allowed in the terms proposed by the Public Trustee.
- Costs shall be in the cause.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
12 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MILIMANI
SUCCESSION CAUSE NO. 378 OF 1980
IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF CHIEF KIBATHI GITANGU – DECEASED
RULING
1. The application for determination is the summons for rectification dated 30th August 2011. The rectification is prompted by the orders of the court of 2nd June 2010 which directed that one Joseph Gitangu Kibathi be included as beneficiary and allocated property from the estate for his inheritance. The Public Trustee had also been required to give details of what each beneficiary gets out of the estate.
2. The rectification application has been supported by the beneficiaries represented by the firm of Messrs. Masore Nyangau & Co. Advocates. Those in opposition have suggested alterations be made to some of the proposals by the Public Trustee.
3. I have carefully gone through the proposals by the Public Trustee and those by the beneficiaries in opposition. I am satisfied that the proposals by the Public Trustee are largely equitable. Exact equality in distribution is not always feasible as various factors are considered in determining shares – such considerations include the relative value of the portion being allocated.
4. I will allow the application dated 20th August 2011 in the terms proposed. Costs shall be in the cause.
DATED, SIGNED and DELIVERED at NAIROBI this31st DAY OF January, 2014.
W. MUSYOKA
JUDGE