[2013] KEHC 6078 (KLR)

[2013] KEHC 6078 (KLR)

The court held that it lacks jurisdiction to grant injunctions in probate and succession proceedings because neither the Law of Succession Act nor the Probate and Administration Rules confer such power. Section 45 of the Law of Succession Act criminalizes intermeddling but does not authorize injunctive relief. Rule 73 on inherent powers cannot be used to grant injunctions where the statute is silent, and Rule 63 does not import the relevant provisions of the Civil Procedure Rules for injunctions into succession practice. Furthermore, both the applicant and respondent are co-administrators, and the property vests equally in them by law. The application for an injunction is therefore...

Citation
[2013] KEHC 6078 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Josephine Wambui Wachuka; Applicant: Agnes Wanjiru Kinyanjui; Applicant: Mary Njoki Gitau; Respondent: Margaret Njoki Njoroge
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
10 May 2013
Case Number
Succession Cause 1016 of 1993
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Injunction
Outcome
application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Administration of Estates, Probate Court Jurisdiction, Injunctions in Succession, Intermeddling With Estate, Confirmation of Grant
Source Language
English
Family and Children Administration of Estates Probate Court Jurisdiction Injunctions in Succession Intermeddling With Estate Confirmation of Grant

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 5 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Josephine Wambui Wachuka

Applicant

Agnes Wanjiru Kinyanjui

Applicant

Mary Njoki Gitau

Applicant

Margaret Njoki Njoroge

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Succession Cause / Ruling on Interlocutory Application for Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the probate court has jurisdiction to grant injunctions in succession proceedings.
  2. 2 Whether the application for an injunction against a co-administrator is competent under the Law of Succession Act and Probate and Administration Rules.
  3. 3 Whether the applicants have demonstrated grounds for grant of an interlocutory injunction.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that it lacks jurisdiction to grant injunctions in probate and succession proceedings because neither the Law of Succession Act nor the Probate and Administration Rules confer such power. Section 45 of the Law of Succession Act criminalizes intermeddling but does not authorize injunctive relief. Rule 73 on inherent powers cannot be used to grant injunctions where the statute is silent, and Rule 63 does not import the relevant provisions of the Civil Procedure Rules for injunctions into succession practice. Furthermore, both the applicant and respondent are co-administrators, and the property vests equally in them by law. The application for an injunction is therefore...

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The application dated 10th September 2012 is dismissed with costs to the respondent.