SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

Musela v Wambui & another & 3 others (Civil Appeal E504 of 2020) [2024] KECA 679 (KLR) (14 June 2024) (Judgment)

[2024] KECA 679 (KLR) Court of Appeal
Read PDF
Court
Court of Appeal
Case number
679
Citation
[2024] KECA 679 (KLR)
Decided
14 June 2024
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivil AppealPostureFirst AppealCoramGW NGENYE-MACHARIA, Madan, Mustapha, Musyoka, W. Musyoka
Holding

We agree with the trial judge that Grace and Magdalene were not widows under Section 3(5) of the Act, and thus Section 29 of the Act is no longer applicable to them.

Facts

The deceased, Lihasi Bidali, died in 2012. His estate has not been inherited for over 12 years. Three women claim to be widows of the deceased: Jedidah, Grace, and Magdalene. The trial court found Jedidah to be the deceased's only wife under Christian rites, while Grace and Magdalene were found to be his wives under Kikuyu Customary Law.

Issues

  1. Whether the trial court was right in presuming that Grace and Magdalene were wives of the deceased based on the concept of presumption of marriage and therefore wives under section 3(5) of the Act.
  2. Whether the court erred by making a finding that children of the Grace and Magdalene were children of the deceased.
  3. Whether the court erred in finding that the children of Grace and Magdalene though not biological children of the deceased were nonetheless beneficiaries of the estate.
  4. Whether the learned judge interfered with the deceased's Will.

Reasoning

The court found that Grace and Magdalene did not establish they were married under a system of law that recognizes polygamy, and thus could not seek refuge under Section 3(5) of the Law of Succession Act.

Outcome

Affirmed the trial court's judgment.

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Law of Succession Act
  • Customary Law
Cases cited (2)
  • Selle v Associated Motor Boat Co. (1968) EA 123
  • Abdul Hameed Saif v Ali Mohamed Sholan (1955) 22 EACA 270
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.3 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case