A retired airline worker has failed in her bid in court to be apportioned half of her former husband’s wealth including motor vehicles, lands, coffee farms, shares in companies and cash in bank.
Instead, Family Court Judge Hillary Chemitei apportioned her 35 per cent of the matrimonial home situated in Loresho, Nairobi, and property acquired by one of the man’s trading companies.
Justice Hillary Chemitei.
Photo credit: File | Nation Media Group
The judge said that even though the woman, codenamed Ms KRN, made zero financial contribution towards acquisition of the home, she contributed by taking care of the man, identified as Mr RGN, and the children.
“The same (home) was purchased through the loan taken by Mr RGN. The repayment of the loan was undertaken during coverture and Ms KRN as a wife in her own way contributed to the repayment albeit indirectly. The business of taking care of the family, the children and the man in ensuring comfort at home in many ways may not be quantified but it is now considered and generally accepted as a contribution to the family property acquisition,” he stated.
The woman had applied for court orders that she was entitled to 50 per cent share in all the properties owned by the former husband, while the man resisted saying she was not entitled to anything having made zero financial contribution.
The properties include apartments in Juja and Mombasa, two coffee farms in Murang’a, four land parcels in Kajiado, beach plots in Likoni Mombasa, three land parcels in Nairobi, four motor vehicles (two Mercedes Benz, pick and two Range Rovers) and shares in four trading companies. The man, in opposition to the 50:50 share application, had told court that his stay with the Ms RKN could not be termed as a proper marriage since they lived intermittently for she was always on the move considering the nature of her work.
He said that she was never a shareholder or a director of any of the companies and that some of the assets the woman wanted were not his own entirely.
However, the court called him out for hiding some of his properties by registering them in a trading company he co-owns with other people.
“It will not be reasonable and equitable to allow the man under the guise of the company law to hide whatever he owned when the marriage was subsisting. What he holds under the company is on trust for and on behalf of his former wife,” said Justice Chemitei.
He stated that although the businessman is insulated by the company laws, he could not wish away the contribution by his former wife.
For instance, the court stated that in 1985, one year after their marriage, the company closed a major business contract with the government to airlift the Kenyan soldiers to Yugoslavia.
This deal brought in substantial sum of income to the company, and resulting from the said earnings, the couple through the company managed to accumulate property.
The couple divorced in 2017 in a petition filed by the woman alleging cruelty. They married in 1984 and separated in 2004.
They had two children together and a third one sired by the man in another relationship but was brought in under their care and custody.
In its verdict, the court said from 1984 to 2004, a period of 20 years the couple lived as husband and wife contrary to the assertion by the man that they lived intermittently.
The woman testified that she worked for two airlines, namely Pan-American and Sabena, until sometimes later when she decided to quit so as to concentrate on the family businesses.
She was heavily involved in the business, especially one company, which had major contracts including airlifting Kenyan soldiers to the former Yugoslavia.
During this period as well, she testified that she took care of the Defendant as a wife and their children including preparing and dropping them to school beside other chores undertaken by a mother.
The court ruled that most of the property that Ms RKN claimed a half share were acquired when they had parted ways.
