In re Estate of the Late Kiplagat Arap Cheboi (Probate & Administration 261 of 2015) [2025] KEHC 18418 (KLR) (15 December 2025) (Ruling)

In re Estate of the Late Kiplagat Arap Cheboi (Probate & Administration 261 of 2015) [2025] KEHC 18418 (KLR) (15 December 2025) (Ruling)

The 3rd Administrator was duly served with the application via her advocates' email, as evidenced by the Return of Service, which was not disputed or challenged. The issues raised have already been determined, and her application is a tactic to delay the conclusion of the matter. There is no merit in her claim of non-service or in her objections to the distribution process.

Citation
[2025] KEHC 18418 (KLR)
Parties
1st Administrator: Titus Kimutai Kiplagat; 2nd Administrator: Betsy Chepchirchir; 3rd Administrator/applicant: Pauline Kiplagat
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
15 December 2025
Case Number
Probate & Administration 261 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Probate & Administration / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Ex Parte Orders
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Setting Aside Ex Parte Orders, Administrator Duties, Distribution of Estate, Frivolous Applications
Source Language
English
Succession Law Setting Aside Ex Parte Orders Administrator Duties Distribution of Estate Frivolous Applications

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Titus Kimutai Kiplagat

1st Administrator

Betsy Chepchirchir

2nd Administrator

Pauline Kiplagat

3rd Administrator/applicant

Procedural Posture

Probate & Administration / Ruling on Application to Set Aside Ex Parte Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court should set aside the ex parte orders issued on 13/03/2025 on the ground that the 3rd Administrator was not served with the application

Ratio Decidendi

The 3rd Administrator was duly served with the application via her advocates' email, as evidenced by the Return of Service, which was not disputed or challenged. The issues raised have already been determined, and her application is a tactic to delay the conclusion of the matter. There is no merit in her claim of non-service or in her objections to the distribution process.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • The 3rd Administrator’s Notice of Motion dated 30/05/2025 is dismissed.
  • The 3rd Administrator shall bear the costs of the application.