The heirs of Kanu-era politician William Cherop Murgor have renewed their court battle over the inheritance and distribution of his assets, estimated at Sh2 billion.
The succession dispute, which started in 2012, appeared to have been resolved by a High Court ruling in December 2024, but five of his children have renewed the fight at the Court of Appeal.
They disagree with the court's order that the estate be divided equally between all the beneficiaries, with their main argument being that some of the properties listed for distribution had been gifted by Murgor to some of his children – and were therefore not available for inheritance by other beneficiaries.
According to court documents, the dispute has been marked by accusations and counter-accusations of meddling, mismanagement, hostility and infighting.
Murgor died on September 28, 2006 at the age of 87. He left behind an extensive estate consisting of both movable and immovable property. He left behind 35 beneficiaries, including five widows.
Among the properties owned by the late politician are at least 29 plots of agricultural and commercial land located in Iten, Eldoret, Sergoit, Kaptagat Scheme and Kapkoi.
In its judgment dated December 20, 2024, the High Court ordered that the estate be distributed equally among the 35 beneficiaries.
However, Dr James Murgor (former Keiyo North MP), Mathew Kipruto Murgor (through his estate), Collins Kipkoech Murgor, Florence Chepkemoi Murgor and Francis Murgor have since escalated the succession dispute to the Court of Appeal, challenging part of the High Court judgment.
Pending the determination of the appeal, they have obtained an order from the High Court partially suspending the implementation of its judgment and the distribution of some properties, including six plots of land in Eldoret, Kaptagat, Kapkoi and Sergoit/Koiwoptaoi.
The High Court had ordered the valuation and sale of the six properties at the prevailing market price and the distribution of the proceeds to all the 35 beneficiaries, after payment of verified liabilities.
They were distributed to James Murgor, Francis Murgor, Collins Kipkoech Murgor and Mathew Kipruto Murgor.
The administrators of the estate had been instructed to give the four siblings first priority in acquiring the said properties before they could be sold to third parties.
"After very carefully weighing the competing rights of the protagonists, taking all relevant factors into account and carefully balancing their interests against each other, the scales of justice, in my view, tilts in favour of granting the orders of stay of execution, but only in respect to the specific properties in contention," said Justice John Robert Wananda.
Suspending the valuation and sale, the judge found that the execution of that part of the judgment before the appeal was determined would not only cause painful and destabilising inconvenience to the applicants, but would also be likely to cause damage which might ultimately prove irreparable if the appeal were successful.
In the order dated March 25, 2025, the judge stated that the transfer of the remainder of the estate as ordered in the judgment was not affected or prevented by the stay order and should proceed unabated.
"Having handled this matter for some time now, it is clear that there has been serious hostility and infighting over the estate, which on many occasions has turned vicious. Because of this, there has been accusations and counter-accusations of mismanagement of the estate and also intermeddling," added the judge.
"There are grievances and credible allegations that a few family members have taken over most of the estate properties and benefited therefrom immensely over the years and have by these acts, excluded other equally entitled beneficiaries."
One of the applicants for the stay of judgment, Dr Murgor, argued that the court erred in holding that the parcels of land known as Eldoret Municipality Plot 4/84 and Sergoit/Koiwoptaoi Block 8/10 were part of the estate and therefore subject to equal distribution to the beneficiaries.
He told the court that the said properties belonged to him and that he was the bona fide beneficial proprietor, having been gifted to him by the late Murgor before his death, and as such did not form part of the estate.
Another beneficiary, Mr Francis Murgor, told the court that a property in Uasin Gishu/Kaptagat Scheme was not subject to distribution as he was in possession of the title deed which was processed by his late father who settled him on the property in 1994 and on which he had done extensive development and built a house.
He stated that the income from his agricultural activities on the farm supports his family, including the education of his son who is studying abroad.
He said that there was a risk that he would suffer substantial loss because the property was listed as part of the estate and he could be evicted from the property unless the court stayed the judgment.
