04836nam 2200613 450 991081472280332120200520144314.09966-53-004-5(CKB)3710000000125879(EBL)1707223(SSID)ssj0001227970(PQKBManifestationID)12554785(PQKBTitleCode)TC0001227970(PQKBWorkID)11280315(PQKB)11384447(OCoLC)899266880(MdBmJHUP)muse38448(Au-PeEL)EBL1707223(CaPaEBR)ebr10879010(CaONFJC)MIL664293(OCoLC)881417068(MiAaPQ)EBC1707223(EXLCZ)99371000000012587920120723h20112011 uy| 0engur|||||||nn|ntxtccrProcedure in the Law of Succession in Kenya /M.A. Ang'awaNairobi, Kenya :LawAfrica Pub. (K) Ltd.,[2011]©20111 online resource (268 p.)Description based upon print version of record.1-322-33011-5 9966-031-12-X Includes bibliographical references.Cover; Title page; Copyright page; Contents; PREFACE; DEDICATION; TABLE OF STATUTES; TABLE OF CASES; LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS; LIST OF TERMINOLOGIES; CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION; 1.1 ORIGINS OF THE SUCCESSION ACT; 1.2(A) STATUTE LAW; 1.2(B) SUCCESSION LAW UNDER HINDU LAW; 1.2(C) SUCCESSION LAW UNDER ISLAMIC LAW; 1.2(D) THE SUCCESSION LAW UNDER CUSTOMARY LAW; 1.3 DEFECTS OF VARIOUS SUCCESSION LAWS; 1.3(A) STATUTORY LAW; 1.3(B) THE HINDU LAW; 1.3(C) ISLAMIC LAWS; 1.3(D) CUSTOMARY LAW; 1.4 TASK OF THE COMMISSION; 1.4.1 Procedure where a person dies intestate or testate; CHAPTER 2 - JURISDICTION2.1 MAGISTRATES COURTS a) Revocation of Grants; b) Appointment of Magistrates; 2.2 HIGH COURT; CHAPTER 3 - TYPES OF GRANTS; 3.1 GRANT OF PROBATE; 3.2 GRANT OF LETTERS OF ADMINISTRATION WITH WILL ANNEXED; 3.3 GRANT OF PROBATE OF PROOF OF ORAL WILL; 3.4 GRANT OF LETTERS OF ADMINISTRATION INTESTATE; 3.5 RESEALING (RULE 42(2)); 3.6 LIMITED GRANT (Grant ad colligenda bona); 3.7 GRANT FOR SPECIAL PURPOSES; 3.7.1 Probate Limited for purposes specified in the will. Rule 11 of 5th Schedule; 3.7.2 Administration pendete lite schedule 5 rule 103.7.3 Grant of letters of administration de Bonis non or Probate at rest 5th Schedule paragraph 16, rules 7,12 de Bonis non 5th Schedule paragraph 17, 19 and 20; CHAPTER 4 - DEATH CERTIFICATE; CHAPTER 5 - WHO IS ENTITLED TO A GRANT?; CHAPTER 6 - CITATIONS; CHAPTER 7 - OBJECTIONS; CHAPTER 8 - CONFIRMATION; 8.1 AFTER 6 MONTHS HAVE EXPIRED; 8.2 PROTEST; CHAPTER 9 - REVOCATION; CHAPTER 10 - RENOUNCIATION; CHAPTER 11 - RECTIFICATION OF GRANT; CHAPTER 12 - APPLICATION UNDER SPECIAL PROVISIONS OF THE ACT; 12.1 Dependent - section 26 rule 45; 12.2 Status of grant12.3 Child to deceased who died intestate - Section 35(3)12.4 Discovery of Codicil after Grant of Probate for a Will is proved- Section 61(1) Rule 47; 12.5 Discovery of Codicil after Grant of Probate for letters of Administration with Will attached- Section 75 Rule 47 (i.e no executor named); 12.6 Discovery of Codicil after Grant of Probate for a Will has been proved- Section 61(2) Rule 48(1); 12.7 Where no provision is provided for application - Section 49; CHAPTER 13 - APPEALS; CHAPTER 14 - PUBLIC TRUSTEE; INDEX; Re Maangi; Hadija v IddiTrouistik Union International & another v Jane Mbeyu & another In the Matter of the Estate of Morarji Bhanji Dhanak (Deceased); In the Matter of the Estate of the Late Simon Timaiyo Mokosio also known as Simon Nemokoosio (Deceased); Rawal v The Mombasa Hardware Ltd; FORMS; FORM 1; FORM 2; FORM 3; FORM 5; FORM 7; FORM 8; FORM 9; FORM 10; FORM 11; FORM 12; FORM 13; FORM 14; FORM 14A; FORM 15; FORM 16; FORM 17; FORM 19; FORM 28; FORM 31; FORM 32; FORM 36; FORM 37; FORM 38; FORM 41; FORM 43; FORM 44; FORM 45; FORM 47; FORM 57; FORM 61; FORM 62; FORM 64; FORM 67; FORM 68; FORM 69; FORM 70; FORM 70AFORM 74Justice Mary Angíawa holds LL.B. and LL.M. degrees from the University of Nairobi. She is an advocate of the High Court of Kenya and a Puisne Judge. She is a fellow of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators. She has taught the law of succession to judicial officers and advocates of the High Court of Kenya.Probate law and practiceKenyaProbate law and practiceAng'awa M. A(Mary A.),1612923MiAaPQMiAaPQMiAaPQBOOK9910814722803321Procedure in the Law of Succession in Kenya3941953UNINA05018nam 22005771 450 991096032090332120250204191038.0978178451065717845106539781784512149178451214110.5040/9781784510657(CKB)4970000000122617(MiAaPQ)EBC6179642(OCoLC)1102435441(UkLoBP)bpp09262561(UkLoBP)BP9781784510657BC(MiAaPQ)EBC31902308(Au-PeEL)EBL31902308(EXLCZ)99497000000012261720181127h20182017 uy 0engurcnu||||||||txtrdacontentcrdamediacrrdacarrierSpencer Bower: reliance-based estoppel the law of reliance-based estoppel and related doctrines /Piers Feltham, Peter Crampin, Tom Leech and Joshua WinfieldFifth edition.©2017Haywards Heath :Bloomsbury Professional,2018.1 online resource (799 pages)Includes index.9781847665706 1847665705 Includes bibliographical references and index.Part I. General principles -- Part II. Particular applications of reliance-based estoppel -- Part III. Proprietary estoppel, election, promissory estoppel and procedure."Spencer Bower: Reliance-Based Estoppel, previously titled Estoppel by Representation, is the highly regarded and long established textbook on the doctrines of reliance-based estoppel, by which a party is prevented from changing his position if he has induced another to rely on it such that the other will suffer by that change. Since the fourth edition in 2003 the House of Lords has decided two proprietary estoppel cases, Cobbe v Yeoman's Row Property Management Ltd and Thorner v Major, whose combined effect is identified as helping to define a criterion for a reliance-based estoppel founded on a representation, namely that the party estopped actually intends the estoppel raiser to act in reliance on the representation, or is reasonably understood to intend him so to act. Other developments in the doctrine of proprietary estoppel have required a complete revision of the related chapter, Chapter 12, in this edition. Thorner v Major confirms too the submission in the fourth edition that unequivocality is a requirement for any reliance-based estoppel founded on a representation. Other views expressed in the fourth edition are also noted to have been upheld, such as the recognition that an estoppel may be founded on a representation of law (Briggs v Gleeds), that a party may preclude itself from denying a proposition by contract as well as another's reliance (Peekay Intermark Ltd v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd and Springwell Navigation Corp v JP Morgan Chase Bank) and that an estoppel by deed binds by agreement or declaration under seal rather than by reason of reliance (Prime Sight Ltd v Lavarello). With the adjustment reflected in the change of title, and distinguishing the foundation of estoppels that bind by deed and by contract, the editors adopt Spencer Bower's unificatory project by the identification of the reliance-based estoppels as aspects of a single principle preventing a change of position that would be unfair by reason of responsibility for prejudicial reliance. From this follow the views: that reliance-based estoppels have common requirements of responsibility, causation and prejudice; that estoppel by representation of fact is, like the other reliance-based estoppels, a rule of law; that the result of estoppel by representation of fact may, accordingly, be mitigated on equitable grounds to avoid injustice; that the result of an estoppel by convention depends on whether its subject matter is factual, promissory or proprietary; that a reliance-based estoppel (other than a proprietary estoppel, which uniquely generates a cause of action) may be deployed to complete a cause of action where, absent the estoppel, a cause of action would not lie, unless it would unacceptably subvert a rule of law (in particular the doctrine of consideration); that an estoppel as to a right in or over property generates a discretionary remedy; and that the prohibition on the deployment of a promissory estoppel as a sword should be understood as an application of the defence of illegality, viz that an estoppel may not unacceptably subvert a statute or rule of law."--Bloomsbury Publishing.EstoppelTextbooksEstoppel340.0942Feltham Piers1786390Leech Tom(Barrister),Crampin PeterWinfield JoshuaUtOrBLWUtOrBLWUkLoBPBOOK9910960320903321Spencer Bower: reliance-based estoppel4317984UNINA