[2022] KEKC 155 (KLR)

[2022] KEKC 155 (KLR)

The court found that the consent judgment, which placed responsibility for the child’s school and Madrasa fees on the applicant, is binding and cannot be varied absent grounds that vitiate a contract. The applicant demonstrated financial challenges but failed to provide convincing evidence of inability to pay or fair treatment between his children, as he continued to pay higher fees for another child. The respondent’s expectation for the child to attend a good school near her residence is legitimate and in the child’s best interests. However, the court cannot compel the respondent to send the child to a different school nor compel the applicant to pay more than his ability or beyond the...

Citation
[2022] KEKC 155 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: HAA; Respondent: AHM
Court
Kadhis Courts
Court Station
Kadhi’s Court at Upper Hill (Nairobi Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
13 October 2022
Case Number
Divorce Cause 198 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Divorce Cause / Post Judgment Application for Variation of Consent Order Regarding Child School Placement and Maintenance
Outcome
Application partially dismissed and partially allowed.
Judges
AH Athman
Legal Topics
Child Custody, Child Maintenance, Consent Orders, School Placement, Parental Responsibility
Source Language
English
Family and Children Child Custody Child Maintenance Consent Orders School Placement 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 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

HAA

Applicant

AHM

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Divorce Cause / Post Judgment Application for Variation of Consent Order Regarding Child School Placement and Maintenance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should grant leave to transfer the minor from St. Daniel School to Kongoni Primary School as sought by the applicant.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent can be compelled to submit the minor for grade assessment to effect the transfer.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant's financial circumstances justify varying the consent order regarding the child's school placement and maintenance obligations.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the consent judgment, which placed responsibility for the child’s school and Madrasa fees on the applicant, is binding and cannot be varied absent grounds that vitiate a contract. The applicant demonstrated financial challenges but failed to provide convincing evidence of inability to pay or fair treatment between his children, as he continued to pay higher fees for another child. The respondent’s expectation for the child to attend a good school near her residence is legitimate and in the child’s best interests. However, the court cannot compel the respondent to send the child to a different school nor compel the applicant to pay more than his ability or beyond the...

Court Disposition

Application partially dismissed and partially allowed.

Orders

  • The child may be enrolled at Al Huda Academy, South B.
  • The applicant shall contribute school fees equivalent to what he paid at The Daniel School (KES 30,000.00 per term).