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

In re Estate of Hassan Abdalla Awale (Deceased) (Succession Cause E378 of 2021) [2024] KEKC 27 (KLR) (13 December 2024) (Ruling)

[2024] KEKC 27 (KLR) KEKC
Read PDF
Court
KEKC
Case number
27
Citation
[2024] KEKC 27 (KLR)
Decided
13 December 2024
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeSuccession CausePostureAppeal from original trial outcomeCoramHon. Al Muhdhar A.S. Hussein C.K
Holding

The Work Injury Benefits Act does not apply to the deceased's employment. The applicable law for distributing the compensation is Islamic law of inheritance.

Facts

The deceased, Hassan Abdalla Awale, passed away in Qatar while employed by European Guarding and Security Services. His employer paid compensation in two tranches. The Public Trustee distributed the funds differently, leading to an application for review.

Issues

  1. Whether the Work Injury Benefits Act applies to this case.
  2. If not, what law governs the distribution of the compensation.
  3. Whether the conditions for review of the court's orders have been met.
  4. What orders should be made regarding the distribution of the compensation.

Reasoning

The deceased was employed outside Kenya and Qatar Labour Law does not apply. The Public Trustee's application for review is dismissed.

Outcome

The Public Trustee's application for review is dismissed.

Orders

  • The original distribution ordered by the Court (12.5% to widow, 16.5% to mother, 71% to son) was correct under Islamic law and shall stand.
  • The Public Trustee is directed to comply with this Court's distribution order dated 9th November 2021.

Authorities cited

Legislation (3)
  • Work Injury Benefits Act
  • Qatar Labour Law
  • Kadhis' Courts Act
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 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case