The High Court in Nairobi has ordered Karen Hospital to release a dead patient’s body unconditionally following a dispute over a Sh2.4 million outstanding medical bill.
The ruling comes as courts increasingly draw a line between hospitals' right to recover unpaid medical bills and families' right to bury their dead, with the judges ruling that medical facilities cannot turn dead patients' remains into collateral for outstanding debts.
Justice Anne Okutoyi said that hospitals cannot use the bodies as security for unpaid debts, holding that a medical facility's right to recover a hospital bill does not extend to making burial conditional on payment.
The dispute involved Justin Mwangi, a patient admitted to Karen Hospital on April 23, 2026, who died on May 24, leaving a Sh4 million bill. The Social Health Authority (SHA) paid Sh421,120, while the family and well-wishers paid Sh1.1 million, leaving a Sh2.4 million balance.
Mwangi’s remains were transferred to Montezuma Monalisa Funeral Home, where they remained during the dispute. His kin, Hannah Ndirangu, then moved to the High Court seeking orders against Karen Hospital.
Ms Ndirangu said the continued detention had prevented the family from burying Mwangi. Her submissions stated that the body had remained at the funeral home for 67 days, causing anguish and distress to relatives.
A judge has upheld a decision by Karen Hospital (pictured) to sack an officer for abetting the misuse of a Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) scanner without billing and invoicing for the services.
Photo credit: File | Nation Media Group
Karen Hospital denied unlawfully detaining the remains. Its financial controller, Penninah Wambui, said the hospital had no physical custody because the body was being held by the independent funeral home.
The hospital said it was willing to facilitate release if Ms Ndirangu provided payment, security or a structured repayment arrangement for the outstanding bill. It also said Leah Wanjiru, identified as Mwangi’s sister, had signed an admission and financial agreement accepting responsibility for medical costs.
Karen Hospital argued that its contractual rights should be honoured and that unconditional release without security would cause financial prejudice. It also argued that the funeral home was a necessary party because it had physical custody of the remains.
Justice Okutoyi rejected that objection, saying the dispute concerned the hospital’s insistence on payment before facilitating release. She held that the funeral home did not have to be joined at that stage.
The court said it was not deciding whether the contractual obligations were ultimately enforceable. It was determining whether the applicant had met the threshold for interim relief.
“The respondent’s own affidavit reveals that it seeks either payment, security, or a structured repayment arrangement before facilitating the release of the body,” Justice Okutoyi said.
“Such a position effectively ties the family’s burial rights to settlement of a civil debt,” she added.
The judge said courts had repeatedly held that there is no property in a corpse and that a dead body cannot be converted into collateral for a civil debt.
“The law has never recognized a deceased body as a chattel capable of being retained as security for a debt,” Justice Okutoyi said.
She cited earlier decisions, including a 2025 case involving Kenyatta University Teaching, Referral and Research Hospital, where the court held that releasing a body does not prevent recovery of an outstanding medical bill through lawful remedies.
The ruling also follows a previous court case involving Karen Hospital and Montezuma Monalisa Funeral Home. In that case, the court ordered the release of Freddy Chieff’s body after finding that it was being detained to pressure relatives over a Sh17.5 million hospital bill.
In November 2025, the High Court at Makueni ordered Westlands Specialist Hospital to release Kanini Mwikali’s body, while requiring payment of half the mortuary fees and a written commitment to settle the hospital bill. The court said treatment and mortuary debts remained recoverable through civil litigation.
Justice Okutoyi said Karen Hospital remained entitled to recover its outstanding money through ordinary civil proceedings. But she found that detention of a corpse was not a lawful debt-recovery method.
“The detention of a corpse is most definitely not one of those options envisaged under the Law,” the court said.
The court noted that delayed burial affects the dignity of the dead, relatives’ emotional well-being and cultural obligations.
