Wadau be updating your records...Woman with two marriage certificates loses Sh19m shares in family row

#1
A woman whose husband died four years ago will not benefit from Sh19.8 million shares he left behind after a judge ruled that her earlier marriage was still subsisting even after conducting a traditional divorce.

In the case, the trustees of the University of Nairobi Pension Scheme, moved to court seeking to determine who should be the rightful beneficiaries of the death benefits amounting to Sh19,800,870.
The court heard that when Prof Nzuve joined the scheme in February 1987, he listed his wife Jacinta Loko and four children, four girls and a son. His wife Jacinta died in 2003 and seven years later, he married Ms Katunge but he never updated his records.
The family was unable to agree on the sharing of the benefits forcing the scheme to file the petition, seeking to determine the rightful beneficiaries and the share to be given to each.
The judge heard that Ms Katunge was married to Mr Masika on February 6, 1998, at the Nairobi Registrar of Marriages’ office. She said the man later disappeared for seven years and she divorced him.

To support her claims, she obtained a letter from the Matungulu chief showing that the marriage was dissolved on December 5, 2001. She also called Mr Masika’s mother, uncle and a brother who confirmed that the union was dissolved when she took back the dowry.
In the judgment, Justice Ongeri said Ms Katunge should have dissolved the marriage as required under the law.
“I find that the First Respondent (Ms Katunge) did not have the capacity to enter into marriage with the deceased since her first marriage to Mr Masika was and is still subsisting,” the judge said.
He, however, noted her two children, although not sired by Prof Nzuve, were supported by him and should, therefore, be listed as beneficiaries.
 
#8
The law is subject to different interpretations, that's why one judge might sentence someone to death only for an appeals court to free him. Both judgements are based on law.
It would be a waste of time to appeal this one. It is true that the law can be subject to different interpretations but that is where there is ambiguity. In this case it is very clear. If you get married at the AG's office, divorce lazime iwe court. Hiyo divorce alifanya haikuwa divorce kilungana na sheria.
 
#11
It would be a waste of time to appeal this one. It is true that the law can be subject to different interpretations but that is where there is ambiguity. In this case it is very clear. If you get married at the AG's office, divorce lazime iwe court. Hiyo divorce alifanya haikuwa divorce kilungana na sheria.
True you divorce where you got married initially.
 

Top