Delahaije v Kasolo & Anor (Administration Cause No. 1558 of 2018)
Observed later treatment
No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.
Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.
AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.
Holding
The High Court denied an application to reseal a Kenyan grant of probate, finding that respondents had locus standi to lodge a caveat where public notice of reseal was given. The court held that where a deceased's will specifies Dutch law as the exclusive inheritance law, a Ugandan court will not reseal a grant made under Kenyan succession law. The court further found contradictory statements about the deceased's domicile undermined the applicant's credibility and that the Kenyan grant exceeded the limited authority granted by power of attorney.
Outcome
Application dismissed. Court declined to reseal the Kenyan grant of probate.
Facts
The late Edmond Van Tongeren (EVT), a Dutch national, died in 2016 leaving a will naming his wife Joyce Jelimo Maru as executor. The will specified that Dutch law would govern the estate. The applicant, holding power of attorney from Ms. Maru for property outside the Netherlands, obtained a grant of probate from the High Court in Kenya stating the deceased was domiciled in Kenya. He then applied to the Ugandan High Court Family Division to reseal the Kenyan grant to enable administration of shares in six Ugandan companies valued over UGX 100,000,000. The respondents, co-shareholders in one of those companies and judgment creditors from a prior dismissed suit, lodged a caveat objecting to the reseal. The applicant had earlier filed Civil Suit 235 of 2017 in Uganda stating the deceased was domiciled in the Netherlands; that suit was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction under Succession Act s.4(2).
Issues
- Whether the respondents had a legal right to lodge a caveat against reseal of the grant of probate with written will to the estate of the late EVT issued to the applicant by the High Court of the Republic of Kenya?
- Whether the applicant should have proceeded by way of ordinary civil suit to have the issues in this matter resolved?
- Whether the applicant was entitled to the reseal of the grant of probate with written will to the estate of the late EVT issued by the High Court of the Republic of Kenya?
Orders
- Application to reseal the grant of probate dismissed.
- Costs awarded to the respondents.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (9)
- Probate (Resealing) Act Cap 160 s.2
- Probate (Resealing) Act Cap 160 s.3
- Probate (Resealing) Act Cap 160 s.4
- Probate (Resealing) Act Cap 160 s.6
- Probate (Resealing) Rules S.I. 160-1
- Succession Act Cap 162 s.4(2)
- Succession Act Cap 162 s.265
- Civil Procedure Act s.98
- Constitution of the Republic of Uganda Chapter 8
Cases cited (3)
- Joyce K. Byabazaire & Anor v Frances Kyomu Katatumba (Civil Suit No. 629 of 1992)
- Hon. Katuntu & Anor v MTN Uganda Ltd & Others (HCCS No. 248 of 2012)
- Re Mauchauffee (1969) EA 424
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.