R W G v P G M (alias G M) [2017] KEHC 5813 (KLR)
- Citation
- [2017] KEHC 5813 (KLR)
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Court
- High Court
- Panel
- DW Mbuteti
- Case number
- Matrimonial Cause 6 of 2016
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- High Court
- Panel
- DW Mbuteti
- Case number
- Matrimonial Cause 6 of 2016
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The court found that the plaintiff had demonstrated a need for interim protection to ensure her peaceful occupation of her matrimonial home and access to tea bushes on the disputed properties, given the ongoing dispute and the defendant's conduct. The defendant's refusal to participate in the proceedings or recognize the court's authority did not oust the court's jurisdiction or the plaintiff's right to seek relief. The court exercised its discretion to grant the interim orders sought, pending the final determination of the main suit, to preserve the status quo and prevent further injustice to the plaintiff.
Court disposition
Interim orders granted in favour of the plaintiff pending determination of the main suit.
Orders
- Plaintiff granted peaceful occupation of her home in land parcel LR LOC 8/GATARA/[particulars withheld] pending disposal of the suit or further order of the court.
- Plaintiff granted peaceful access to her tea bushes on land parcel LR LOC 2/GACHARAGE/[particulars withheld] pending disposal of the suit or further order of the court.
- Costs of the application shall be in the cause.
02
Material facts
Parties
R W G
Plaintiff Counsel: plaintiff's learned counselP G M (alias G M)
Defendant03
Procedural history
Posture
Matrimonial Property Cause / Interlocutory Application (ruling on Notice of Motion for Interim Orders)
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the plaintiff is entitled to interim protection for peaceful occupation of her matrimonial home pending determination of the main suit.
- 02
Whether the plaintiff should be granted access to tea bushes on the disputed property as part of matrimonial property rights.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The plaintiff argued that she and the defendant jointly acquired the properties during their long marriage and that she requires court protection to ensure peaceful occupation of her home and access to tea bushes, as the defendant has interfered with her enjoyment of these rights. She opposed referral to elders, noting previous failed attempts at such arbitration.
- Respondent
- The defendant did not file any response or submissions, but orally stated in court that he did not recognize the court's authority and preferred the dispute be referred to local elders for arbitration. He declined to participate further or engage counsel.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Matrimonial Property Act, 2013 (Kenya); Civil Procedure Rules
The court has jurisdiction to grant interim protective orders to preserve the rights of parties in matrimonial property disputes pending final determination.
- 02
Giella v Cassman Brown [1973] EA 358
A party seeking interim relief must demonstrate a prima facie case and the need for protection to prevent irreparable harm or injustice.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The court found that the plaintiff had demonstrated a need for interim protection to ensure her peaceful occupation of her matrimonial home and access to tea bushes on the disputed properties, given the ongoing dispute and the defendant's conduct. The defendant's refusal to participate in the proceedings or recognize the court's authority did not oust the court's jurisdiction or the plaintiff's right to seek relief. The court exercised its discretion to grant the interim orders sought, pending the final determination of the main suit, to preserve the status quo and prevent further injustice to the plaintiff.
Obiter and limits
- It is regrettable that an elderly couple married since 1951 has fallen out in their sunset years.
- The defendant's refusal to recognize the court's authority does not affect the court's mandate to protect parties' rights.
Court disposition
Interim orders granted in favour of the plaintiff pending determination of the main suit.
- Plaintiff granted peaceful occupation of her home in land parcel LR LOC 8/GATARA/[particulars withheld] pending disposal of the suit or further order of the court.
- Plaintiff granted peaceful access to her tea bushes on land parcel LR LOC 2/GACHARAGE/[particulars withheld] pending disposal of the suit or further order of the court.
- Costs of the application shall be in the cause.
Source and reliance status
High Court
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
High Court
Judgment
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MURANG’A
MATRIMONIAL PROPERTY CAUSE NO 6 OF 2016
R W G……………………………PLAINTIFF
VERSUS
P G M (alias G M)……...….…DEFENDANT
R U L I N G
1. In her originating summons dated 27/07/2016 the Plaintiff seeks against the Defendant declarations and other orders regarding certain properties that she has pleaded are matrimonial properties acquired by their joint effort during subsistence of their marriage over many decades. They are still married.
2. Together with the originating summons the Plaintiff filed notice of motion dated 27/07/2016seeking temporary orders to ensure her access to some tea-bushes in one of the properties and peaceful occupation of her home in another property. The application is supported by the Plaintiff’s affidavit annexed to the application.
3. The Defendant did not file any papers in response to the application; but he was present in court on 28/02/2017 when the application came up for hearing. He declined more time offered to him by court to file papers or hire the services of an advocate. He declared loudly that he would not file any papers; that he would not hire the services of an advocate; that he did not recognise the authority of the court to hear the dispute between him and his wife; and that the dispute ought to be referred to their local headman and elders for arbitration. On her part the Plaintiff declined such arbitration, pointing out that it had been attempted before without any outcome.
4. I have read the application and supporting affidavit. I have also considered the submissions of the Plaintiff’s learned counsel and those of the Defendant.
5. The parties are an elderly couple who have been married since the year 1951. It is a pity that they have fallen out in their sunset years. The Defendant has another wife. He and his two wives have a total of 17 children, all adults.
6. I am satisfied from the material now before the court that pending disposal of the main cause, the Plaintiff needs the protection of the court for peaceful occupation of her home in land parcel LR LOC 8/GATARA/[particulars withheld] and peaceful access to her tea bushes on land parcel LR LOC 2/GACHARAGE/[particulars withheld]. I will therefore grant prayers 2 and 3 in the notice of motion, the orders to remain in place pending disposal of the suit or the further order of the court. It is so ordered. Costs of the application shall be in the cause.
DATED AND SIGNED AT MURANG’A THIS 11TH DAY OF MAY 2017
H P G WAWERU
JUDGE
DELIVERED AT MURANG’A THIS 19TH DAY OF MAY 2017
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.