The High Court in Kenya has finally brought to a close a protracted and contentious legal battle spanning nearly 13 years. The ruling, delivered by Justice Hillary Chemitei, unequivocally upholds the validity of the will authored by the late British national, Roger Bryan Robson, who passed away on August 8, 2012. This decision effectively dismisses rival claims from several parties who sought to challenge the authenticity and execution of Robson's multi-million-shilling estate.
The case, which has lingered in the courts for over a decade, serves as a powerful testament to the meticulous scrutiny applied in probate law. Justice Chemitei's ruling confirms that the will, meticulously prepared by Robson in 1997, was properly executed, duly witnessed, and professionally drafted by a qualified advocate. This comprehensive finding decisively puts to rest persistent allegations that the document was a forgery, finally clearing the path for the deceased's true intentions to be honored.
Roger Bryan Robson, who died childless, had appointed lawyer Guy Spencer Elms and Sean Battye as the executors of his estate in his will, dated March 24, 1997. Battye later renounced his role after relocating overseas, leaving Elms with the weighty responsibility of carrying out Robson's final wishes. It is often in such circumstances, where an individual's final wishes are challenged, that the true test of a legal system's robustness comes into play.
Among the prominent figures who contested the will were Thomas Murima Mutaha, a businessman and director of Plovers Haunt Ltd—a company claiming a stake in a valuable Upper Hill property—and Agnes Kagure, a well-known politician and businesswoman who asserted she had purchased a parcel of land in Karen directly from Robson in 2011. Both parties vehemently argued that the will was not genuine, aiming to invalidate it and secure their purported claims to Robson's assets.
However, Justice Chemitei was unswayed by these assertions. In a decisive pronouncement, the judge dismissed all claims of forgery, stating, "There is no evidence to suggest that the deceased was under any pressure or coercion. It appears he voluntarily visited his lawyer and expressed his intentions clearly." This finding underscores the importance of a testator's free will and sound mind at the time of executing a will, a cornerstone of succession law. The court also found no indication that Guy Spencer Elms, the executor, stood to gain personally from the will, instead observing that he was solely acting in Robson’s best interests, further bolstering the will's legitimacy.
One of the arguments presented against the will was its alleged lack of a detailed list of Robson’s specific properties. This common point of contention in estate disputes was also addressed by Justice Chemitei, who noted that its absence was not sufficient grounds to invalidate the entire document. “If any properties were left out, they can be handled as intestate assets. That alone cannot nullify a valid Will,” he added, providing clarity on how such omitted assets would be managed under the law of succession. This highlights a crucial principle: the primary aim of the court is to give effect to the testator's intentions where a valid will exists, rather than to invalidate it over minor omissions.
Robson, who had no children, had meticulously instructed that his assets be liquidated upon his death, with the proceeds to be distributed between his nephew and several local environmental charities. This benevolent and clear directive, now upheld by the High Court, ensures that his legacy will benefit both his family and causes close to his heart.
This ruling by Justice Hillary Chemitei serves as a significant precedent, reinforcing the sanctity of a properly executed will in Kenya. It sends a strong message that unfounded claims and speculative allegations, even when stemming from high-profile individuals, will not derail the rightful distribution of an estate as intended by the deceased. For Guy Spencer Elms, who has diligently safeguarded Robson’s final wishes for over a decade, this judgment is a vindication of his commitment and integrity, allowing true justice to finally be served. The protracted nature of this case underscores the complexities that can arise in estate disputes, but ultimately, it demonstrates that with patience and adherence to the law, rightful outcomes can prevail.
