Please wait, loading...
Over the past quarter-century, Nyiha, Mukoma & Co. Advocates has had the privilege of handling cases and projects that have shaped jurisprudence and made a positive impact on our community. We take pride in the milestones we have achieved, the precedents we have helped set, and the trust our clients have placed in us through pivotal moments.
In the aftermath of the incident, the 1st respondent filed a suit against the 2nd respondent for negligence, alleging that the 2nd respondent was acting within the course and scope of his employment with BM Security Limited. However, the appellant, BM Security Limited, denied liability, contending that the 2nd respondent was not acting within the scope of his employment when he carried the 1st respondent as an unauthorized passenger, in direct contravention of the company's express prohibitions and the 2nd respondent's contractual obligations.
At the heart of the Act are the specific and general Codes of Conduct and Ethics, which lay down the fundamental principles guiding public officers. These codes emphasize efficiency, honesty, conflict of interest avoidance, political neutrality, and the shunning of nepotism. Moreover, they mandate public officers to submit biennial financial declarations, enhancing financial transparency.
A direct transfer of property attracts payment of stamp duty at market value. Gifts made by an owner to another party during the lifetime of the owner are generally not exempt from stamp duty payment. There are, however, some exceptions to the general rule.
Marriage is not simply the legalization of an informal union, of some “set of heterosexual unions undertaken with some idea of duration and manifested to the relevant social environment.”[1] Rather, marriage is a union of unconditional love between a man and a woman. In marriage, a man and a woman pledge to love each other without conditions, giving themselves completely to each other.
Not everything that can be done should be done. Assisted reproductive technology reduces people to objects for use. It is, therefore, unconstitutional and morally reprehensible. The Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill of 2023, which seeks to legalize assisted reproductive technology, should not be passed into law.
If the matrimonial property belongs entirely to each spouse, it is simply incorrect to speak of them owning the property in “proportions” as the Supreme Court did. The proportion proper to each spouse is the whole. And while it is true that some people may actively mistreat, manipulate, or exploit their spouses, these problems are properly dealt with according to the logic of self-gift that animates the union of marriage. What a man has given does not belong to him anymore.
Here, it would be appropriate to consider what property is and its place in a marriage. In the modern context, we commonly think of property as a thing that we have the right to use without restraint (at least, in principle), and from which we have the right to exclude others.[1] Things that we own are surrounded, figuratively speaking (or even literally!),[2] by a fence. We have a right to use whatever is on our side of the fence however we want, provided that we don’t interfere with other people’s capacity to do the same. Our property is our own, and we decide what to do with it. Like our own purpose, the purpose of our property is up to us to decide.
At the heart of this judgment lie conflicting notions of property and marriage, giving rise to divergent notions of matrimonial property. The Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal use terms falling on either side of this divide when ruling on the appropriate distribution of matrimonial property. The realities these terms signify remain the same, regardless of the actual opinions of the judges who used them.
Conforming the definition of “spouse” in the Law of Succession Act to that in the Marriage Act. This would mean that, even for purposes of succession, men in monogamous marriages would have no legal capacity to marry other women under customary law, and their wives in their monogamous marriages would need not fear being automatically disinherited of matrimonial property. This is especially important given that, as of 2019, there are six times more widows than widowers in Kenya.[1] Even biologically, men just have a lower life expectancy.
©Nyihamukoma & Co Advocates 2025. All rights reserved.
©Nyihamukoma & Co Advocates 2025. All rights reserved.
Nyihamukoma & Co AdvocatesContact us
Advocates, Commissioners for Oaths and Notaries PublicOUR LOCATIONWhere to find us?
P.O. Box 28491- 00200 Nairobi KenyaNyihamukoma & Co AdvocatesContact us
Advocates, Commissioners for Oaths and Notaries Public.OUR LOCATIONWhere to find us?
P.O. Box 28491- 00200 Nairobi KenyaGET IN TOUCHNyihamukoma Social links
Visit our social pages.