[2012] KEHC 1865 (KLR)

[2012] KEHC 1865 (KLR)

The court found that the administratrix failed to provide any justification for the significant disparity in the shares allocated to her daughters, particularly as one daughter received a much larger share than the others without explanation. The court held that the power of appointment under Section 35(2) of the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2012] KEHC 1865 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Jane Rwamba Njeru; Applicant: Kellen Wanja Njagi; Respondent: Eglas Ciurunji Njeru
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Embu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Succession Cause 415 of 2002
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Application for Variation of Distribution
Outcome
Application for variation of distribution allowed; shares among beneficiaries varied as per court's directions.
Judges
HI Ong'udi
Legal Topics
Succession, Intestate Distribution, Variation of Grant, Discrimination in Inheritance
Source Language
en
Family and Children Succession Intestate Distribution Variation of Grant Discrimination in Inheritance

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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jane Rwamba Njeru

Applicant

Kellen Wanja Njagi

Applicant

Eglas Ciurunji Njeru

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Succession Cause / Ruling on Application for Variation of Distribution

  1. 1 Whether the administratrix discriminated against the applicants in the distribution of the deceased's estate.
  2. 2 Whether the court should vary the apportionment of shares among the beneficiaries under Section 35(3) and (4) of the Laws of Succession Act.
  3. 3 Whether the applicants were properly notified and involved in the confirmation of grant proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the administratrix failed to provide any justification for the significant disparity in the shares allocated to her daughters, particularly as one daughter received a much larger share than the others without explanation. The court held that the power of appointment under Section 35(2) of the Laws of Succession Act must be exercised fairly and without discrimination. Since the applicants were not shown to have received any gifts or other allocations during the deceased's lifetime and were not properly involved in the confirmation proceedings, their application for variation was justified. The court exercised its power under Section 35(4) to vary the distribution,...

Court Disposition

Application for variation of distribution allowed; shares among beneficiaries varied as per court's directions.

Orders

  • Kellen Wanja Njagi to receive 0.20 hectares.
  • Bertha Muthoni Gilbert to receive 0.4 hectares.