High Court 4499 of 2026

Property Beneficiary Id No Size/ Acreage Kapsaret/simат Block 2(simat)/384 Isaiah Kiptоо Kiptanui 20078794 0.084 Ha Kapsaret/simат Block 2(simat)/385 Boaz Kiplimo Sanga 20965814 0.042 Ha Kapsaret/simат Block 2(simat)/386 Daniel Kirwa Serem 24079484 0.084 Нa Kapsaret/simat Block 2(simat)/387 Rosa Jeptanui Terer 6858269 620. Hа Japhet Kipkemboi Kering 21419509 1.072 Ha 24536577 1.072 На 28362539 0.084 Hа 13807134 0.126 Ha 6858269 6871074 21419509 24536577 33400046 25184035 27466257 6871074 40021927 9871796 27783408 26647521 0.220 Hа Julius Kering Kimeli Joshua Kipchumba Joseph Taketany Kapsaret/simaт Block 2(simat)/388 Kapsaret/simат Block 2(simat)/388 Kimeli Rosa Jeptanui Terer Jane Ngisirei Jeptanui Japhet Kipkemboi Kering Julius Kering Kimeli Catherine Chemutai Terer Priscillah Тerer & Jeртоо Elzebah Terer Jeptum Jane Ngisirei Jeptanui 0.730 Hа 0.220 Hа 0.220 Hа 0.042 Hа 0.084 Hа Jointly 0.084 Hа 0.042 Hа 0.084 Hа 0.202 Ha 0.042 Hа Damaris Jepngetich Ludia Jebor Henry Saro Fredrick https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/4499/eng@2026-04-02 2

page 2 of 4

Naum Jepkoech Kapsaret/simат Block 2(simat)/389 Jane Ngisirei Jeptanui Jane Ngisirei Jeptanui 6871074 6871074 28157259 30906452 3.898 Hа 0.084 На 0.084 На Jointly 6858269 6871074 0.1825 Нa 0.1825 На Ruth Jelagat And Magdaline Chepleting Kapsaret/simат Block 2(simat)/390 Rosa Jeptanui Terer Jane Ngisirei Jeptanui Decision 2. Rectification of Grants is provided for in section 74 of the Law of Succession Act, Cap 160, Laws of Kenya and Rule 43(1) of the Probate and Administration Rules. Section 74 provides as follows: “ 74. Errors may be rectified by court: Errors in names and descriptions, or in setting forth the time and place of the deceased’s death, or the purpose in a limited grant, may be rectified by the court, and the grant of representation, whether before or after confirmation, may be altered and amended accordingly.” 3. Rule 43(1) provides as follows: “ Where the holder of a grant seeks pursuant to the provisions of section 74 of the Act rectification of an error in the grant as to the names or descriptions of any person or thing or as to the time or place of death of the deceased or, in the case of a limited grant, the purpose for which the grant was made, he shall apply by summons in Form 110 for such rectification through the registry and in the cause in which the grant was made.” 4. The court addressed this issue in Marley v Rawlings (2014) where it was observed: 'I accept that the expression 'clerical error' can have a narrow meaning,whichwould be limited to mistakes involved in copying or writing out a document...the expression is not one with a precise or well-established, let alone a technical meaning. The expression can also carry a wider meaning, namely a mistake arising out of office work of a relatively routine nature, such as preparing, filing, sending, organizing the execution of, a document (save, possibly, to the extent that the activity involves some special expertise). Those are activities which are properly to be described as 'clerical', and a mistake in connection with those activities, such as wrongly filing a document or putting the wrong document in an envelope, can properly be called 'a clerical error'...it seems to me that the expression 'clerical error' in s.20(1)(a)should be given a wide, rather than a narrow meaning.' 5. Rectification requires that the parities to the grant of representation demonstrate that the written instrument issued by the court does not reflect the agreement because of a common mistake. What is required for a common mistake is often decided in Judgements and rulings without a full explanation of the nature of mistake required. The premise underlying a rectification of grant of representation is https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/4499/eng@2026-04-02 3

page 3 of 4

the administrators desire to maintain the legal instrument and its validity but in a crystal clear format in terms of description of the property or the names of the beneficiaries. The rectification of the grant of representation whether confirmed or not requires the Applicant to demonstrate the common mistake or error apparent on the face of the record. The nature of a common mistake as compared to a mutual mistake or unilateral mistake is that the substance of the mistake is the same as between the parties. In the context of rectification for common mistake, the satisfaction of the common mistake requirement may as well be described as res -ipsa loquitur. 6. In ordering rectification under Section 74 of the Law of Succession Act and Rule 43 of the Probate and Administration Rules, the court does not rectify the substratum or the subject matter of the grant of representation but what it rectifies is the erroneous expression of the instrument to give it clarity and authenticity as the parties intended while moving the summons for grant of representation of confirmation. This is the threshold to be measured in the application and affidavit before this court. It turns out that the Applicant has shown that there is merit to grant the orders. 7. In view of the above principles, the application for amendment of grant be and is hereby allowed in terms of the proposals on distribution captured elsewhere in this ruling. With this in mind the Deputy Registrar shall cause the amendment of the grant dated 9th June 2025. I make no orders as to costs. It is so ordered. DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT ELDORET VIA CTS THIS 2ND DAY OF APRIL 2026 ………………………………………….. R. NYAKUNDI JUDGE https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/4499/eng@2026-04-02 4

page 4 of 4