Matenjwa & another (Suing as the Personal Representatives of the Estate of Onesmus Matenjwa Kuria) v Joreth Limited & 2 others
The bottom line
#When a plaintiff suing on behalf of a deceased person's estate dies, only administrators of that same estate can take over the case in Kenya.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the Applicants merit the prayers sought in their application for substitution
Key legal issues
#Whether the Applicants, as administrators of the estate of Onesmus Matenjwa Kuria, had locus standi to be substituted for the deceased plaintiffs
The application was merited; the Applicants were properly substituted because the suit belonged to the estate of Onesmus Matenjwa Kuria, of which they are the confirmed administrators.
The deceased plaintiffs had sued in a representative capacity as administrators of the estate of Onesmus Matenjwa Kuria. Under Section 2 of the Civil Procedure Act, a legal representative is one on whom the estate devolves on the death of the party suing. Since the suit was originally instituted by Onesmus Matenjwa Kuria, his estate should continue with it. The Applicants produced a certificate of confirmation of grant rectified by the High Court Family Division, establishing their capacity; grants for the deceased plaintiffs' own estates were unnecessary.
Whether the suit had abated before the substitution application was filed
The suit had not abated at the time the Applicants filed the application.
The court noted from its record that counsel had informed it on 14th November 2022 that both plaintiffs had passed on, and the court had directed that a formal application for substitution be filed. The application dated 3rd August 2023 was filed in pursuit of those directions, so the suit had not abated when the application was lodged.
Legal principles established
#- Where plaintiffs sue as administrators of a deceased person's estate, their proper substitutes upon death are other administrators of that same estate, not administrators of the deceased plaintiffs' own estates.
Court orders
#- 1.The Applicants be deemed as properly substituted in place of the deceased Plaintiffs, Elizabeth Wanjiru Matenjwa and Michael N. Njuguna
- 2.The costs of the application shall be in the cause
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original civil jurisdiction of the Environment and Land Court; application under Order 24 Rules 2 and 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules and Section 71 of the Law of Succession Act
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
Upon their death therefore, their replacements can only be other administrators of the estate of Onesmus Matenjwa Kuria; not the administrators of the estate of Elizabeth Wanjiru Matenjwa and Michael N. Njuguna.
This case was originally instituted by Onesmus Matenjwa Kuria. It is his estate therefore that should continue with the suit.
I find that the Applicant's Notice of Motion dated 3rd August, 2023 is merited and I hereby grant the orders sought therein with the result that the Applicants be deemed as properly substituted in place of the deceased Plaintiffs, Elizabeth Wanjiru Matenjwa and Michael N. Njuguna.
The costs of the application shall be in the cause
Issues in the judgment
#Applicants' names in body differ from case title parties
Caption lists deceased persons as current plaintiffs while substitution application is by different persons
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Matenjwa & another (Suing as the Personal Representatives of the Estate of Onesmus Matenjwa Kuria) v Joreth Limited & 2 others", Case Analysis (2023). Environment & Land Case 135 of 2012. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2023/20968/eng@2023-10-24
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.