[2025] KEHC 8820 (KLR)

[2025] KEHC 8820 (KLR)

The court found that while the Applicant and Respondent had a long period of cohabitation, the Applicant failed to prove the element of general repute necessary for a presumption of marriage. Therefore, no marriage was presumed. However, the court held that the Applicant demonstrated a common intention with the Respondent to acquire Apartment L.R. No. 209/20263 jointly, as evidenced by financial contributions to the deposit, legal fees, stamp duty, and the parties' shared residence. Applying the doctrine of constructive trust, the court apportioned beneficial interests in the property at 25% for the Applicant and 75% for the Respondent, reflecting their respective contributions. The court...

Citation
[2025] KEHC 8820 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: JOO; Respondent: MAC
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
9 June 2025
Case Number
Family Originating Summons E031 of 2022
Procedural Posture
Family Originating Summons / Judgment
Outcome
Applicant awarded 25% beneficial interest in the property; Respondent awarded 75%. No presumption of marriage established. Each party to bear own costs.
Judges
CJ Kendagor
Legal Topics
Presumption of Marriage, Cohabitation Property Rights, Constructive Trust, Beneficial Interest Apportionment
Source Language
English
Family and Children Land and Property Presumption of Marriage Cohabitation Property Rights Constructive Trust Beneficial Interest Apportionment

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

JOO

Applicant

MAC

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Originating Summons / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there is a presumption of marriage between the Applicant and the Respondent.
  2. 2 Whether the Applicant has a legally recognizable interest in Apartment L.R. No. 209/20263.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that while the Applicant and Respondent had a long period of cohabitation, the Applicant failed to prove the element of general repute necessary for a presumption of marriage. Therefore, no marriage was presumed. However, the court held that the Applicant demonstrated a common intention with the Respondent to acquire Apartment L.R. No. 209/20263 jointly, as evidenced by financial contributions to the deposit, legal fees, stamp duty, and the parties' shared residence. Applying the doctrine of constructive trust, the court apportioned beneficial interests in the property at 25% for the Applicant and 75% for the Respondent, reflecting their respective contributions. The court...

Court Disposition

Applicant awarded 25% beneficial interest in the property; Respondent awarded 75%. No presumption of marriage established. Each party to bear own costs.

Orders

  • Sole ownership of Apartment L.R. No. 209/20263 by the Respondent is severed.
  • The property shall be owned by the Applicant and Respondent in the ratio of 25%:75%, respectively.