[2025] KEHC 6641 (KLR)

[2025] KEHC 6641 (KLR)

The court found that the trial court properly considered the evidence and applied the correct legal principles in awarding custody of the minors to the respondent. The trial court was guided by the best interests of the child, as mandated by the Constitution and the Children Act, and took into account both the financial and emotional needs of the minors. The appellant failed to provide consistent financial support and did not demonstrate that the respondent was unfit to have custody. The respondent's willingness to surrender custody due to lack of support did not negate the trial court's findings, as the appellant's conduct—abandoning the minors and failing to provide for them—was not in...

Citation
[2025] KEHC 6641 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: AOO; Respondent: SAM
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kisumu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
23 May 2025
Case Number
Civil Appeal E006 of 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Judges
A Mabeya
Legal Topics
Child Custody, Child Maintenance, Best Interests of Child, Parental Responsibility
Source Language
English
Family and Children Child Custody Child Maintenance Best Interests of Child Parental Responsibility

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AOO

Appellant

SAM

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial court erred in awarding custody of the minors to the respondent despite alleged lack of sufficient evidence.
  2. 2 Whether the trial court failed to consider that the appellant was better placed to have custody of the minors.
  3. 3 Whether the trial court properly applied the best interests of the child principle in its determination.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the trial court properly considered the evidence and applied the correct legal principles in awarding custody of the minors to the respondent. The trial court was guided by the best interests of the child, as mandated by the Constitution and the Children Act, and took into account both the financial and emotional needs of the minors. The appellant failed to provide consistent financial support and did not demonstrate that the respondent was unfit to have custody. The respondent's willingness to surrender custody due to lack of support did not negate the trial court's findings, as the appellant's conduct—abandoning the minors and failing to provide for them—was not in...

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.
  • The judgment of the trial court of 29/8/2024 is upheld.