Court excludes St Mary’s Academy properties from late Bishop Rwakatare’s estate

The application challenged a High Court ruling issued on December 6, 2024, at the Temeke Integrated Justice Centre by Judge Gladys Barthy.

It was filed by the late bishop’s daughter, Ms Kellen Rwakatare, together with St Mary’s International Academy Limited.

Bishop Rwakatare, a former Morogoro Region MP and founder of Mlima wa Moto Church in Mikocheni, Dar es Salaam, as well as St Mary’s International Academy schools, died on April 20, 2020, without leaving a will.

Following her death, her children, Kellen Rwakatare, Tibe Rwakatare, Humphrey Keneth, and Mutta Rwakatare, were appointed administrators of her estate.

Under probate procedures, the administrators were required to submit an inventory and valuation of assets within six months, followed by final accounts to the court.

They later submitted final accounts listing 38 items, including shares and assets in seven institutions operating in Dar es Salaam and Mbeya.

However, the inventory was signed by only three administrators, Tibe, Humphrey and Mutta, who later became respondents in the revision application filed by Kellen and St Mary’s International Academy Limited.

Ms Kellen, who did not sign the document, objected to the inclusion of several properties, arguing that they belonged to the academy and not the deceased.

She further argued that St Mary’s International Academy Limited had not been included in the original High Court proceedings.

She also claimed that Plot No. 701, Block 46, Kijitonyama in Kinondoni District, which she said belonged to the deceased, had been wrongly excluded from the estate.

The High Court dismissed her objection, ruling that she had failed to prove that the disputed properties belonged to St Mary’s International Academy Limited.

It also upheld the distribution of assets contained in item 38 of the inventory.

Revision application

Dissatisfied, Ms Kellen and St Mary’s International Academy Limited, which had not been part of the High Court proceedings, filed a revision application at the Court of Appeal.

The application, supported by affidavits sworn on December 20, 2024, and by their lawyer, Respicius Didace, on December 30, 2024, raised seven grounds of complaint.

They argued that the High Court erred by treating company-owned assets as part of the deceased’s estate and by relying on the inventory without a proper legal basis.

They also contended that St Mary’s International Academy Limited was condemned without being heard, contrary to principles of natural justice, as its assets were included in the estate despite it not being a party to the proceedings.

Further, they argued that the High Court exceeded its jurisdiction by determining ownership of assets belonging to a company rather than the deceased.

They also challenged the acceptance of final accounts, which they said were not jointly prepared or approved by all administrators and their lawyers, Armando Swenya and Respicius Didace.

During the hearing, advocates Didace and Swenya represented the applicants, while Shehzada Walli appeared for the first respondent, and Fredrick Massawe and Ditto Amri represented the second and third respondents.

The applicants’ lawyers argued that although the late Bishop Rwakatare was a shareholder in St Mary’s International Academy Limited, company ownership did not extend to its assets, as only her shares formed part of her estate.

In response, Mr Walli submitted that the inventory was lawfully prepared and that there was no legal requirement for all administrators to jointly sign it.

He further argued that the High Court correctly found that Ms Kellen had failed to prove that the academy was not owned by the deceased.

Another counsel supported the same position, stating that there was no evidence showing the disputed assets belonged to the company as claimed by the applicants.

Court’s decision

In their judgment, the appellate judges observed that the record showed Ms Kellen did not participate in preparing the final accounts as she was admitted at Aga Khan Hospital in Dar es Salaam at the time of signing.

“The submission that the second applicant participated in discussions and agreed to the inventory has, in our view, no supporting evidence,” the judges said.

The court held that her objections were valid, noting that she had not consented to the final distribution agreed upon by the other administrators.

The judges further found that the High Court misapplied Section 104 of the Probate Law by including assets belonging to a non-party, St Mary’s International Academy Limited, in the estate proceedings.

On Plot No. 701, Block 46, Kijitonyama, the court noted that while ownership was disputed, it was properly included in the estate as it was not registered in the company’s name.

The judges emphasised the legal principle that upon the death of a shareholder, what is inherited is shares in a company, not the company’s assets.

“There is no dispute that, apart from the Kijitonyama plot, all other properties are registered in the name of St Mary’s International Academy Limited. None bears the name of the deceased,” the court stated.

“In general, the High Court was wrong in holding that the disputed properties belonged to the deceased,” added the judgement.

The Court of Appeal concluded by ordering that all properties belonging to St Mary’s International Academy Limited be removed from the estate, leaving only the deceased’s shareholding interests in the company.

The decision was amended to retain only Plot No. 701, Block 46, Kijitonyama, Kinondoni District, Dar es Salaam, within the estate. Each party was ordered to bear its own costs.