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

Kandie & 2 others v Beatrice Jepkemoi Cherogony [2002] KEHC 1175 (KLR)

[2002] KEHC 1175 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
1175
Citation
[2002] KEHC 1175 (KLR)
Decided
16 October 2002
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivil AppealPostureAppeal from the judgment of the Resident Magistrate's CourtCoramG.E.O TUNYA
Holding

The deceased was buried at his Tiriondonin rural home in Baringo District.

Facts

The deceased, Dr. Sammy Chebii Cherogony, died at Moi Teaching and Referral Hospital. His widow, Beatrice Jepkemoi Cherogony, sought a permanent injunction to allow her to bury the deceased at Molo, where he had purchased land, and a declaration that she had the sole right to conduct the funeral. The appellants, the deceased's father and brothers, opposed the burial at Molo and insisted on burial at the deceased's ancestral home in Baringo District.

Issues

  1. Both the deceased and the respondent were Tugens. Were they subject to Tugen customs and practices on burial matters?
  2. If so, what were these customs and practices? Are they repugnant to justice and morality or any written law?

Reasoning

The deceased was a Tugen and his burial place was determined by Tugen customary law. The deceased's wish to be buried at Molo was not proved, and the trial magistrate's main reason for ordering burial at Molo was a misconception of the evidence.

Outcome

The appeal is allowed, and the deceased is buried at Tiriondonin, Baringo District.

Orders

  • A permanent injunction to restrain the defendants from interfering with the funeral arrangements and burial ceremony of the deceased at his home in Molo is set aside.
  • The deceased is ordered to be buried at Tiriondonin, Baringo District.

Remedies

  • Each party shall bear its own costs herein and in the court below.
  • The cost of the mortuary shall be shared equally.
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 0.1 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case