[2013] KEHC 4947 (KLR)

[2013] KEHC 4947 (KLR)

The High Court found that the warrant of arrest issued against the applicant was precipitated by confusion regarding the hearing date, which was not properly listed in the cause list and was altered in the court record. Given that the respondent did not object to the lifting of the warrant, and in the interests of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2013] KEHC 4947 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Charles Kariithi Aritho; Respondent: Christina Atumwa Emenyi
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Mombasa
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Appeal 5 of 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Interlocutory Application (chamber Summons) Seeking Stay and Variation of Orders Pending Appeal
Outcome
Application partially allowed; warrant of arrest set aside; maintenance and attachment issues referred to trial court.
Judges
JV Juma
Legal Topics
Child Maintenance, Warrants of Arrest, Interlocutory Orders, Attachment of Salary
Source Language
en
Family and Children Civil Procedure Child Maintenance Warrants of Arrest Interlocutory Orders Attachment of Salary

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

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

Parties

Charles Kariithi Aritho

Appellant

Christina Atumwa Emenyi

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Interlocutory Application (chamber Summons) Seeking Stay and Variation of Orders Pending Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the warrant of arrest issued against the applicant by the Children.s Court should be set aside pending appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant should be allowed to continue paying maintenance as previously ordered pending the determination of the appeal.
  3. 3 Whether the High Court should intervene in the attachment of the applicant.s salary before the Children.s Court concludes its process.

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court found that the warrant of arrest issued against the applicant was precipitated by confusion regarding the hearing date, which was not properly listed in the cause list and was altered in the court record. Given that the respondent did not object to the lifting of the warrant, and in the interests of justice, the court set aside the warrant of arrest pending the hearing and determination of the appeal. However, the court declined to grant the applicant liberty to continue paying maintenance as previously ordered or to interfere with the process of attachment of salary, holding that these matters were properly before the Children.s Court, which was already seized of the...

Court Disposition

Application partially allowed; warrant of arrest set aside; maintenance and attachment issues referred to trial court.

Orders

  • Prayer 2 of the application is allowed; the warrant of arrest issued on 10th October, 2012 is set aside pending the hearing and determination of the appeal.
  • Prayer 4 of the application is referred back to the trial court for determination.