REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI SUCCESSION CAUSE NO. 884 OF 2010 IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF HANNAH WANJIRU MWANIKI (DECEASED) RULING 1. The pending application is dated 31st December 2012. It seeks review of an order made by Njagi J. on 3rd May 2012. 2. Although the application is for review premised on Order 45 rule 1 of the Civil Procedure rules, the applicant swore and filed an affidavit on 10th November 2014 asking to call a certain person as a witness. This necessitated that the matter go for directions on the mode of disposal of the said application. 3. Applications for review essentially target a decision in terms of having it reevaluated on the grounds set out in Order 45 rule 1 – error apparent on the face of the record, discovery of new important evidence that was not available at the time of trial and any other sufficient reason. Ideally, the instant application is ideal for disposal by way of oral or written submissions as opposed to the taking of viva voce evidence. 4. I do not see the basis upon which viva voce evidence is to be taken at this stage. I therefore direct that the application dated 31st December 2012 be argued in the usual way, by way of oral arguments or written submissions, as may be directed. 5. The application dated 31st December 2012 to be heard by any Judge of the Family Division on a date to be given at the registry. DATED, SIGNED and DELIVERED at NAIROBI this 25TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2015. W. MUSYOKA JUDGE
A note on accuracy. These pages are generated automatically from our AI-written case briefs and have not been checked by a lawyer. Case titles and citations come from Kenya Law; the counts, topics, propositions and “treatment” labels are derived from the briefs and can be incomplete or wrong. Use them as a research aid and always read the original judgment before relying on anything here. This is not legal advice.