[2015] KEHC 4685 (KLR)

[2015] KEHC 4685 (KLR)

The court found that the parties had lived separately since August 2008, a period exceeding six years, and that all attempts at reconciliation had failed. The evidence showed that the marriage could not be revived, with the Petitioner unwilling to continue the union and the Respondent unable to compel him. The court applied Section 66 of the Marriage Act, which provides that a marriage is deemed to have irretrievably broken down if the parties have lived apart for at least two years. The court concluded that the Petitioner had proved, on a balance of probabilities, that the marriage had irretrievably broken down and that there was no reasonable prospect of reconciliation. Accordingly, the...

Citation
[2015] KEHC 4685 (KLR)
Parties
Petitioner: G M; Respondent: C M C
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kericho
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
5 June 2015
Case Number
Divorce Cause 18 of 2008
Procedural Posture
Divorce Cause / Judgment
Outcome
Petition allowed; marriage dissolved.
Legal Topics
Divorce, Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage, Cruelty, Separation, Marriage Act, Custody and Access
Source Language
English
Family and Children Divorce Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage Cruelty Separation Marriage Act Custody and Access

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 2 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

G M

Petitioner

C M C

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Divorce Cause / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the marriage between the Petitioner and Respondent has irretrievably broken down.
  2. 2 Whether the Petitioner has proved cruelty or other grounds for dissolution of marriage on a balance of probabilities.
  3. 3 Whether the court should grant a decree of divorce.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the parties had lived separately since August 2008, a period exceeding six years, and that all attempts at reconciliation had failed. The evidence showed that the marriage could not be revived, with the Petitioner unwilling to continue the union and the Respondent unable to compel him. The court applied Section 66 of the Marriage Act, which provides that a marriage is deemed to have irretrievably broken down if the parties have lived apart for at least two years. The court concluded that the Petitioner had proved, on a balance of probabilities, that the marriage had irretrievably broken down and that there was no reasonable prospect of reconciliation. Accordingly, the...

Court Disposition

Petition allowed; marriage dissolved.

Orders

  • The marriage celebrated between the Petitioner and Respondent on 25th February, 2000 is dissolved.
  • A decree nisi dissolving the marriage is issued, to be made absolute after thirty (30) days.