A new dawn for women’s household labour: Turning care work into economic power
Married couple in their kitchen.
What you need to know:
- The Court of Appeal has upheld Section 7 of the Matrimonial Property Act (2013), rejecting Fida’s plea for automatic 50:50 division of property upon divorce.
- The judges said spouses must prove their contribution—monetary or otherwise—before assets can be shared; weeks later, new KNBS data valued unpaid domestic and care work at Sh2.24 trillion, revealing women perform five times more of it than men.
- Though courts remain cautious, the KNBS valuation gives women new leverage in property disputes, with advocates saying the numbers could strengthen future claims, bridging the gap between emotional labour and economic justice.
A month ago, the Court of Appeal dealt a blow to efforts seeking to invalidate a section of the law that leaves it to the courts to calculate and estimate a woman’s non-monetary contribution to the acquisition of property during marriage.
In 2016, the Federation of Women Lawyers (Fida) in Kenya challenged the constitutionality of Section 7 of the Matrimonial Property Act (2013). The section stipulates that ownership of matrimonial property vests in the spouses according to their respective contributions towards its acquisition and shall be divided between them if they divorce or their marriage is otherwise dissolved.
In its petition before the High Court’s Constitutional and Human Rights Division in Nairobi, Fida-Kenya argued that as written, the section infringes married women’s rights to property after the dissolution of marriage, since they must prove their contribution to its acquisition.
It contended that although the law defines contribution to include both monetary and non-monetary forms, spouses who contributed financially were in a better position. “This meant that the man spouse was advantaged compared to the woman spouse whose non-monetary contribution had been left to the whims of the courts to calculate and or estimate,” Fida-Kenya stated in court documents.
The effect, they argued, has been discrimination, denial, and violation of women’s property rights, leading to decisions contrary to the constitutional command under Article 45(3), which provides that parties to a marriage shall have equal rights at the time of the marriage, during the marriage, and upon its dissolution.
For Fida-Kenya, this provision implied the 50:50 sharing of matrimonial property upon the end of a marriage, irrespective of contribution. However, in its 2018 ruling, the High Court concluded that the impugned section neither violated any provision of the Constitution nor contradict the Act itself—and dismissed the petition.
In its decision, the court observed that proving non-monetary contribution is not difficult. “All that a party is required to do is to provide evidence on details of his or her non-monetary contribution in the marriage and leave it to the Court hearing the dispute to determine,” it said.
With such evidence, the court would apply the law and appropriate legal principles to arrive at a fair valuation of the non-monetary contribution in the circumstances of each case, it added. Aggrieved by the decision, Fida-Kenya moved to the Court of Appeal in Nairobi. On October 3, 2025, the appellate court dismissed the appeal.
“As we understand it, the practical challenge, which the appellant says has a discriminatory effect, is that while, for instance, it may be easier to produce bank statements and other documentary evidence to establish financial or monetary contribution, it may not be so regarding non-monetary contributions such as provision of household management and childcare,” the appellate judges noted.
“However, at the end of the day, it is a question of evidence and courts are equipped to assess the weight and credibility or otherwise of the evidence presented, whether documentary or non- documentary, by the parties with a view to determining whether the spouse claiming contribution has discharged his/her burden of proof in that regard.”
Now, women have some backing. On November 4, 2025, the Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (KNBS) released its costing of the economic value of unpaid domestic and care work in Kenya. It found that women spend 25.8 billion hours compared to 4.8 billion hours by men.
In 2021, unpaid domestic and care work in Kenya was valued at Sh2.24 trillion, with women contributing Sh1.89 trillion of that amount. “On average, if UDCW (unpaid domestic and care work) activities had been remunerated, each woman aged 15 years and above would have earned Sh118,845 in 2021, whilst men aged 15 years and above would each have earned Sh22,676 for the same period,” said KNBS in the costing.
This conversion of non-monetary to monetary value offers women renewed hope for fairer distribution of property when marriages end.
According to Jessica Oluoch, gender and land tenure specialist at Landesa, a global organisation promoting secure land rights as a pathway to social justice and gender equality, Kenya’s Constitution guarantees equality before, during and after marriage. However, in practice, this equality has yet to be fully realised.
“Ideally, division of matrimonial property during divorce should mirror the equal partnership that a marriage represents,” said Jessica. “But in reality, the scales often tilt against women.”
She noted that many women take on unpaid care responsibilities, including childcare, housework and managing households, which are not financially valued during divorce proceedings. “By the time people get married and one partner decides to stay home to take care of children, unpaid care work is not quantified. It is not considered to be of monetary value,” she explained.
In court, what counts is evidence. “The courts tend to focus on who paid for the property; who made the bank transfers, who has receipts,” Jessica said. “This has mostly been men, so they end up with the bigger share. Unfortunately, women’s non-monetary contribution and the calculation of that contribution has been varying.”
Court rulings have been inconsistent, with some women receiving as little as 10 per cent of matrimonial property despite years of unpaid labour. “For example, there are women who will get maybe 10 per cent from a parcel of land because the court says, ‘You cooked, you cleaned, you did everything, so maybe you deserve a small amount,’” she said. “But there has not been a specific quantification that guarantees women a certain percentage for their unpaid care work. Courts have been relying on precedent.”
Jessica said the recent move by the KNBS to assign economic value to unpaid care work could begin to influence how courts interpret women’s contributions in matrimonial property cases.
“It will influence future court rulings and specifically play a persuasive role,” she explained. “After the publication of the statistics, the next step should be adopting the data into law, either through the Matrimonial Property Rules or amendments to the Matrimonial Property Act.”
According to Jessica, the statistics can now be used in court to show that unpaid care work has tangible value based on research involving both women and men. Still, legal and structural gaps persist. While the Constitution guarantees equality, its realisation depends on supportive laws and effective enforcement mechanisms. To bridge this gap, she suggested co-registration of property between spouses.
“When people get married, they have the option to co-register property so that there’s no need to prove who contributed what,” she explained. “Co-registration reduces harm and recognises the contributions both partners bring into the marriage, whether financial or non-financial.”
Jessica emphasised that awareness of existing laws such as the Marriage Act and the Matrimonial Property Act is essential for men and women. “As much as the Constitution says there is equality, we must take steps to make it real,” she said. “If co-registration does not exist, then the statistics from the research can guide courts to make fairer decisions in future.”
