[2025] KEHC 10407 (KLR)

[2025] KEHC 10407 (KLR)

The court found that the grounds of appeal did not touch on the issue of the Jebrock Plot, which was the subject of the previous appeal in Kakamega HCCA No 20 of 2020. Instead, the current appeal raised new issues regarding the admission of a will and new documents by the trial Kadhi, which were not previously litigated. The court held that the matter was not res judicata as the issues were distinct from those previously determined. The court also found that the preliminary objection did not raise a pure point of law sufficient to dispose of the appeal at this stage. Furthermore, the court emphasized the importance of access to justice and the right to be heard, noting that any delay in...

Citation
[2025] KEHC 10407 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: SM; Respondent: MG
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Vihiga
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
14 July 2025
Case Number
Civil Appeal E026 of 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Preliminary Objection
Outcome
preliminary objection dismissed
Judges
JN Kamau
Legal Topics
Matrimonial Property, Res Judicata, Preliminary Objection, Admission of New Evidence
Source Language
English

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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SM

Appellant

MG

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Preliminary Objection

  1. 1 Whether the appeal is barred by the doctrine of res judicata.
  2. 2 Whether the preliminary objection raised by the respondent discloses a pure point of law.
  3. 3 Whether the admission of new documents and the issue of a will can be canvassed in the substantive appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the grounds of appeal did not touch on the issue of the Jebrock Plot, which was the subject of the previous appeal in Kakamega HCCA No 20 of 2020. Instead, the current appeal raised new issues regarding the admission of a will and new documents by the trial Kadhi, which were not previously litigated. The court held that the matter was not res judicata as the issues were distinct from those previously determined. The court also found that the preliminary objection did not raise a pure point of law sufficient to dispose of the appeal at this stage. Furthermore, the court emphasized the importance of access to justice and the right to be heard, noting that any delay in...

Court Disposition

preliminary objection dismissed

Orders

  • The respondent's preliminary objection dated and filed on 28th May 2024 is dismissed.
  • Each party will bear its own costs of the preliminary objection.