[2019] KEHC 12197 (KLR)
The court found that the trial magistrate's order for maintenance was reasonable in the absence of updated financial information and given the appellant's earning capacity. The court emphasized that the appellant's personal financial commitments do not override his statutory duty to provide for his child. The needs...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] KEHC 12197 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: DGM; Respondent: LMM
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal 24 of 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed with costs
- Judges
- A Ali-Aroni
- Legal Topics
- Child Maintenance, Interim Orders, Parental Responsibility
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
DGM
Appellant
LMM
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the trial court erred in ordering the appellant to pay Kshs. 15,000 per month as child maintenance and provide medical cover.
- 2 Whether the trial court failed to consider the appellant's income and the respondent's living circumstances.
- 3 Whether the absence of updated financial disclosure affected the fairness of the maintenance order.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the trial magistrate's order for maintenance was reasonable in the absence of updated financial information and given the appellant's earning capacity. The court emphasized that the appellant's personal financial commitments do not override his statutory duty to provide for his child. The needs of the child, which likely increased since the original order, further justified the maintenance amount. The appeal was dismissed as the appellant failed to demonstrate that the trial court exercised its discretion improperly or that the maintenance order was unjustified.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed with costs
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed with costs to the respondent.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
FAMILY DIVISION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 24 OF 2014
DGM..........................................................................................APPELLANT
VERSUS
LMM.......................................................................................RESPONDENT
(Being an Appeal from the Ruling of Hon. F. K. Munyi Ag. Principal Magistrate
delivered on the 18th March, 2014 in Nairobi Children’s Court Case No. 1199 of 2013)
JUDGMENT
1. In a ruling dated 18th March, 2014 pursuant to an interlocutory application where the Respondent/mother sought for maintenance of the child subject of these proceedings, the Appellant was ordered to pay maintenance of Kshs.15,000/= a month and to provide for the minor’s medical needs through his employer’s medical scheme.
2. The Appellant was aggrieved by the said order and appealed to this court on grounds that the trial court failed to consider that the Respondent resided with her parents; she had failed to make disclosure of material facts; and that the court speculated on the parties income the court having failed to direct parties to file their affidavit of means and for failing to consider the Appellant’s income.
3. I have considered submissions by the Appellant’s counsel alongside the grounds of appeal and also taken note of the interim orders by this court allowing the Appellant to pay maintenance of kshs.10,000/= a month as an interim measure,
4. In arriving at a decision, the court notes that the ruling being appealed from was an interim ruling and dating back to 2014. Secondly the payslip relied upon at the time by the appellant was for March 2014; 3 years back.
The court further takes cognisant that circumstances relating to the parties and the child may have since changed coupled with the fact that the court was not updated on the current status of the trial.
5. With the above, the mind of this court resonates with the findings of Kimaru J that the Appellant has reasonable pay and if he committed his salary to the extent that he cannot meet his parental responsibility he has himself to blame.
6. In addition, this court’s thinking is that the child who was at the time the interim order was made in nursery school must now be in primary school and her needs much more.
7. Coupled with the above the sum granted by the Magistrate in the absence of details of the current status of the parties and the child appear reasonable.
8. The appeal stands dismissed with costs.
SIGNED DATEDandDELIVEREDin open court this 19TH day of DECEMBER, 2019.
..................
ALI-ARONI
JUDGE