[2018] KEHC 4070 (KLR)

[2018] KEHC 4070 (KLR)

The court found that the properties in question, specifically KISUMU/WATHOREGO and Maseno plots, were acquired during the marriage and thus constitute matrimonial property under the Matrimonial Property Act, 2013. Both parties contributed to the acquisition and development of these properties, and the respondent...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] KEHC 4070 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: J M R A; Respondent: B O O
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kisumu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Suit 1 of 2017
Procedural Posture
Originating Summons / Judgment
Outcome
Matrimonial properties declared and ordered to be divided equally between the parties; exclusive entitlement and eviction claims dismissed; costs to be shared equally.
Judges
DAS Majanja
Legal Topics
Matrimonial Property Division, Contribution Assessment, Ownership Presumption, Property Registration, Trust in Property, Costs in Family Litigation
Source Language
en
Family and Children Matrimonial Property Division Contribution Assessment Ownership Presumption Property Registration Trust in Property Costs in Family Litigation

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 5 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

J M R A

Applicant

B O O

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Originating Summons / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the properties acquired during the marriage constitute matrimonial property subject to division under the Matrimonial Property Act, 2013.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to exclusive ownership of the matrimonial home in Maseno.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent and his mistress should be ordered to vacate the matrimonial home.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the properties in question, specifically KISUMU/WATHOREGO and Maseno plots, were acquired during the marriage and thus constitute matrimonial property under the Matrimonial Property Act, 2013. Both parties contributed to the acquisition and development of these properties, and the respondent failed to rebut the statutory presumption of trust or to prove lack of contribution by the applicant. The court held that both parties are entitled to equal shares in the identified matrimonial properties. The court declined to grant exclusive entitlement of the Maseno house to the applicant or to order the respondent and his mistress to vacate, as proprietary rights were settled...

Court Disposition

Matrimonial properties declared and ordered to be divided equally between the parties; exclusive entitlement and eviction claims dismissed; costs to be shared equally.

Orders

  • KISUMU/WATHOREGO and Maseno plots declared matrimonial property with each party entitled to a 50% share.
  • The matrimonial properties shall be valued within ninety (90) days and sold thereafter, with proceeds shared equally between the applicant and respondent. Costs of valuation and sale to be shared equally.