[2025] KEHC 2790 (KLR)

[2025] KEHC 2790 (KLR)

The court found that the applicants and the legal guardian were unaware of the biological father's identity at the time of the original adoption hearing, having relied on a birth certificate that omitted his name. The subsequent discovery of official records naming Benard Maina Gakenge as the father constituted new...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] KEHC 2790 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: DHK; Applicant: SWK; Respondent: MNN
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Adoption Cause E141 of 2024
Procedural Posture
Adoption Cause / Ruling on Application for Review of Adoption Orders
Outcome
application for review allowed; adoption orders reviewed to dispense with biological father's consent
Judges
BM Musyoki
Legal Topics
Adoption Review, Dispensation of Parental Consent, Best Interest of Child
Source Language
en
Family and Children Adoption Review Dispensation of Parental Consent Best Interest of Child

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

DHK

Applicant

SWK

Applicant

MNN

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Adoption Cause / Ruling on Application for Review of Adoption Orders

  1. 1 Whether the court should review its adoption orders to dispense with the consent of the biological father whose identity was discovered after the initial adoption order.
  2. 2 Whether the new evidence regarding the biological father justifies a review of the adoption judgment.
  3. 3 Whether dispensing with the biological father’s consent is in the best interest of the child.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants and the legal guardian were unaware of the biological father's identity at the time of the original adoption hearing, having relied on a birth certificate that omitted his name. The subsequent discovery of official records naming Benard Maina Gakenge as the father constituted new and material evidence. The court accepted that the biological father has never been involved in the child's life, and his whereabouts remain unknown. In light of the best interest of the child, and to facilitate the registration of the adoption, the court held that the consent of the biological father should be dispensed with. The judgment was reviewed accordingly to include an...

Court Disposition

application for review allowed; adoption orders reviewed to dispense with biological father's consent

Orders

  • DHK and SWK are allowed and authorised to adopt DNW.
  • The child’s name shall, after adoption, remain DNW.