Estate battle: Court settles bitter fight over ex-mayor's hidden will

The late Joseck Thuo’s greatest secret before his death in 2021 was perhaps the contents of his Will.

Thuo, a former mayor, confided in his driver, Robert Kavisu, in 2020 about the existence of the document, instructing him that it should be moved from one vehicle to another.

The Will was wrapped in a piece of newspaper and stapled in an effort to conceal it. Kavisu knew of its existence, but its contents remained unknown to him.

According to court documents, Kavisu said Thuo had instructed him to hand over the Will to one of his sons, Nixon, in the presence of his other brothers upon his death.

Before his passing in December 2021, at the age of 88, Thuo fell ill, and Kavisu accompanied him to hospital in an ambulance. At the time, Susan Thuo and her son, Geoffrey, drove in a Mercedes containing the Will.

Three days later, Kavisu went to retrieve the document from the car and noticed that the newspaper wrapping had disappeared, leaving only an envelope.

In honour of his late employer, he handed the document to Nixon in the presence of his brothers, as instructed.

Days later, however, two other copies of the Will emerged. The family subsequently visited the firm of Kagucia and Company Advocates, who had drafted the Will for the late mayor.

Kavisu maintained that Thuo had never mentioned the existence of other copies and that he did not know who had tampered with the document.

Family rift

Thuo’s death and the revelation of his Will deepened divisions within the family. He was survived by two widows, Mary Wanjiru and Susan Wanjiru, four sons, and a daughter.

In August 2022, a battle over the control of his estate began when Harrison Ngeta and Nahashon Kabiri filed a petition at the High Court in Nakuru seeking probate of Thuo’s Will. The two, who said Thuo was their uncle, claimed they had been named as executors.

Wanjiru, her son Nixon, and daughter Maurine Mukami objected to the petition. They alleged that the Will was forged, pointing to property allegedly not owned by the deceased, inaccurate descriptions of assets, wrongly identified beneficiaries, and inconsistencies in print, font sizes, and signatures.

In their affidavit, Wanjiru and Nixon stated that the purported Will was a forgery, as it failed to provide for them and referred to property never owned by the deceased.

Wanjiru further disputed the authenticity of the signature on the document and noted that it bore the stamp of Kagucia Advocate, who had nonetheless confirmed receiving a copy. Nixon also questioned the Will’s authenticity, expressing doubt that his father would have entrusted management of his disabled sister to his brothers, James and Geoffrey.

Nixon claimed that Geoffrey, his stepbrothers, and cousins had colluded to alter the Will. In June 2022, he filed a complaint with the Directorate of Criminal Investigations (DCI) in Nakuru, requesting an inquiry.

On April 4, 2023, the DCI wrote to Kagucia and Company Advocates requesting a copy of the original Will. The DCI also filed an application in court for copies, but the request was declined.

On  April 17, 2023, the law firm replied that it did not possess the purported original Will, stating that “our client collected all counterparts of the Will on February 22 2026.”

However, on February 2, 2024, Kagucia appeared in court and produced a copy which he said he had retained.

Emmanuel Karisa, a document examiner engaged by the objectors, compared the Will with known samples of the deceased’s handwriting and signatures. He concluded that the Will and related documents were authored by different individuals.

Karisa also noted that some pages appeared to have been printed on different machines and later inserted into the Will.

Nonetheless, Ngeta, Kabiri, James Ngeta, Geoffrey Ngeta, and Erick Kimondo insisted the Will was genuine and denied all claims of forgery.

The court summoned Advocate Gatenjira Kagucia to explain his role. He testified that Thuo had been his friend and client since 1990 and had instructed him to draft the Will, which took two years owing to the size of the estate.

On February 3, 2016, Thuo executed the Will before him and in the presence of witnesses. Kagucia said he prepared three bound copies, one of which Thuo was to deposit at Barclays Bank. He retained a certified copy for his records. He confirmed that all copies were identical and valid.

Court ruling

Justice Julius Nang’ea, in a ruling delivered last month, dismissed the objections raised by Wanjiru, Nixon, and Mukami, finding no credible evidence of fraud.

“I find no credible evidence of fraud. Mr Kagucia Advocate, who was a long-time advocate and friend of the deceased, confirmed that the Will dated 3/2/2026 produced in court is the genuine Will he drafted for the deceased. The attesting witnesses also vouch for the Will, and so do the Executors whom the deceased approached to assist in that role,” ruled the court.

The court held that Kavisu’s claims of interference could not be believed, given Kagucia’s undisputed evidence that the Will held by relatives matched the copy in his custody.

“In light of the evidence from Mr Kagucia, the attesting witness, and the Executors, the opinion of the document examiner called by the objectors is not credible,” the court ruled.

The Will was declared valid, and the executors were granted until November 10, 2025, to oversee transmission of the estate. Last month, the court stayed its order allowing executors to transmit the estate as per the Will.