[2022] KEHC 2280 (KLR)

[2022] KEHC 2280 (KLR)

The court found that the petition and notice of motion were improperly before the Constitutional and Human Rights Division of the High Court because the substantive issue—custody of children—falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Children’s Court or the Family Division of the High Court, as provided by...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KEHC 2280 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: DNU; Respondent: Chief Registrar of the Judiciary; Respondent: Resident Magistrate Children’s Court, Milimani; Interested Party: GAO
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Constitutional Petition E067 of 2021
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Ruling on Preliminary Objection and Jurisdiction
Outcome
petition and notice of motion struck out for want of jurisdiction and procedural defects
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction of High Court, Children Custody Disputes, Sub Judice Principle, Public Officer Suing Requirements, Forum Shopping, Exhaustion of Remedies
Source Language
en
Constitutional Law Family and Children Civil Procedure Jurisdiction of High Court Children Custody Disputes Sub Judice Principle Public Officer Suing Requirements Forum Shopping +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

DNU

Applicant

Chief Registrar of the Judiciary

Respondent

Resident Magistrate Children’s Court, Milimani

Respondent

GAO

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Petition / Ruling on Preliminary Objection and Jurisdiction

  1. 1 Whether the High Court Constitutional and Human Rights Division has jurisdiction to hear a petition concerning child custody when a related matter is pending before the Children’s Court.
  2. 2 Whether the petition is fatally defective for failure to enjoin the Attorney General when public officers are sued in their official capacity.
  3. 3 Whether the doctrine of sub judice applies to bar the petition.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the petition and notice of motion were improperly before the Constitutional and Human Rights Division of the High Court because the substantive issue—custody of children—falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Children’s Court or the Family Division of the High Court, as provided by Section 73 of the Children Act. The court also noted that the petitioner failed to enjoin the Attorney General despite suing public officers in their official capacity, contrary to Article 156(4) of the Constitution and Section 12(1) of the Government Proceedings Act. Furthermore, the court held that the matter was sub judice, as there was an active case involving the same parties...

Court Disposition

petition and notice of motion struck out for want of jurisdiction and procedural defects

Orders

  • The petition dated 4th March, 2021 is struck out.
  • The notice of motion dated 4th March, 2021 is struck out.