Mary Juster Makau v Nahashon Kingoo Wambua [2022] KEELC 910 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court refused to evict anyone because the party named had died four years earlier, and no legal representative had been substituted.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether execution proceedings can continue against a deceased party
The application was irregularly filed against a dead person; it cannot proceed and no personal representative has been brought on record
The process server's affidavit confirmed the Respondent died about four years before service was attempted, and the notice and motion were returned unserved. Order 5 Rule 8(1) CPR requires personal service, which is impossible against a deceased person. Order 24 CPR governs substitution of legal representatives, but none was brought in. Relying on Court of Appeal authority, the court held proceedings against a dead person are a nullity and the application could not proceed.
Legal principles established
#- There can never be proceedings against a dead person; a personal representative should be brought into the suit by the decree holder
Court orders
#- 1.The application dated 30th July 2021 cannot proceed as it is filed against a deceased party
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Sections 1A, 1B and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act and all other enabling provisions of the law
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Mary Juster Makau v Nahashon Kingoo Wambua [2022] KEELC 910 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2022). Makueni Environment and Land Court No. 336 of 2017 (Execution Application dated 30th July 2021). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2022/910/eng@2022-03-09
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.