A Nairobi court has awarded a divorced woman half of her former husband’s properties, company shares and bank deposits after finding that her unpaid domestic work and support helped build the family’s wealth during their 10 years of marriage.
The judge found that after Ms EWM married Mr CGM, she abandoned her electronics import business and devoted herself to raising their children and managing the home as Mr CGM remained working and expanding his businesses.
In a judgment that reinforces the rights of spouses under the Matrimonial Property Act, the High Court ruled that non-monetary contribution carries equal weight to direct financial input in sharing matrimonial assets.
The court held that Ms EWM was entitled to a 50 percent stake in several assets acquired during her marriage to Mr CGM, including property in Nairobi, company shares and money held in bank accounts in Kenya and Uganda.
The couple married in 2009 under Kikuyu customary law and lived together before separating in 2019. They had three children.
Ms EWM told the court that the marriage collapsed after she discovered that Mr CGM had married three other women between 2016 and 2018. She later filed for divorce, which was granted.
A court has awarded a divorced woman half of her former husband’s assets, including property in Nairobi, company shares and money held in bank accounts in Kenya and Uganda.
Photo credit: Shutterstock
The court noted that Mr CGM never appealed the divorce decree despite admitting in court that he was aware of the case proceedings.
At the centre of the dispute was a battle over properties, motor vehicles, business interests and bank deposits accumulated during the marriage.
Ms EWM sought recognition as a beneficial co-owner of several parcels of land in Mlolongo, Athi River, Nanyuki and Nairobi. She also claimed interests in eight vehicles, two companies and accounts held at Absa Bank and Equity Bank in Nairobi and Kampala.
The court, however, limited its orders to assets whose ownership had been sufficiently proved during the hearing.
It ruled that Ms EWM would get half of the man's land parcel in Nairobi's Thome Estate and half of any movable or immovable assets registered in his name.
She was also awarded half of five percent shareholding held by Mr CGM in a company jointly owned with his brother. His stake at the company was deemed to be a family business.
“‘Family business’ means any business which is run for the benefit of the family by both spouses or either spouse, and generates income or other resources wholly or partly for the benefit of the family,” the court ruled.
The court further directed that Ms EWM receives half of all money held in the former spouse's bank accounts.
The judge said the law recognises domestic work, childcare, companionship and management of family affairs as valid contribution towards acquisition of matrimonial property.
“It is now common knowledge that non-monetary contribution is as good as monetary and ought to be taken into account in determining such cases,” the judge ruled. “Therefore, in the case at hand, both the plaintiff and the defendant equally contributed to the acquisition.”
During the hearing, Ms EWM testified that she abandoned her own electronics import business after her husband pushed her to focus on the family and their businesses.
She said she used to import goods from China and had invested Sh70,000 in the venture before it was shut down.
The court accepted her evidence that she managed the home, cared for the children and supported the family while Mr CGM travelled extensively for business.
“She took care of the home and family when the defendant travelled extensively worldwide and provided companionship as well,” the judgment states.
Although most of the contested assets were not registered jointly, the court said that alone did not extinguish her rights.
The court found that one company had been incorporated during the marriage and benefited from the support structure Ms EWM provided at home.
In its verdict, the court rejected Mr CGM's attempts to shield the company from the matrimonial dispute by arguing that it was a separate legal entity.
“A party cannot hide under the Companies Act to defeat the rights of his/her spouse. It is common knowledge that this company, was incorporated during coverture and traded and managed to acquire several assets in the process,” the court ruled.
It said Ms EWM’s indirect contribution enabled her former husband to dedicate time to the business and expand its operations.
Mr CGM had denied that his former wife contributed to the acquisition of the properties and also disputed the existence of a valid customary marriage.
He argued that no Kikuyu customary rites had been performed and claimed that the only property registered in his name was the Thome Estate house.
But the court dismissed the argument, saying the existing divorce decree confirmed there had been a marriage.
“The question of the defendant marrying three other women successively does not water down the fact that the divorce court found there was a marriage,” the judge said.
At the same time, the court declined Ms EWM’s request for an order compelling Mr CGM to deposit Sh10 million for upkeep of the children, saying the issue belonged to the Children’s Court where maintenance proceedings were already ongoing.
The judge directed the former couple to divide the assets within 90 days. Where physical sharing is impossible, the properties may be sold through public auction, and proceeds shared equally.
