[2002] KEHC 1040 (KLR)
The court found that the applicants had fulfilled all statutory requirements for adoption, including the three-month fostering period. The infants were abandoned and their natural parents' identities are unknown, justifying the dispensing of parental consent. The applicants demonstrated genuine care, stable living...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2002] KEHC 1040 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: JLL; Applicant: GLL; Guardian Ad Litem: Ann Marie Pruitt
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 66 of 2001
- Procedural Posture
- Adoption Cause / Ruling
- Outcome
- adoption granted
- Legal Topics
- Adoption of Children, Best Interests of Child, Dispensing With Parental Consent
- 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
JLL
Applicant
GLL
Applicant
Ann Marie Pruitt
Guardian Ad Litem
Procedural Posture
Adoption Cause / Ruling
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicants should be allowed to adopt the infants given the circumstances of abandonment.
- 2 Whether the consent of the natural parents is necessary or can be dispensed with due to unknown identity.
- 3 Whether the adoption is in the best interests of the infants despite racial differences between applicants and infants.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicants had fulfilled all statutory requirements for adoption, including the three-month fostering period. The infants were abandoned and their natural parents' identities are unknown, justifying the dispensing of parental consent. The applicants demonstrated genuine care, stable living conditions, and future planning for the children. The court considered the racial difference but accepted the applicants' assurances regarding the children's welfare and preparedness for potential challenges. The guardian ad litem and the Children’s officer both recommended the adoption. The court concluded that authorizing the adoption would serve the best interests of the...
Court Disposition
adoption granted
Orders
- The applicants are authorized to adopt the infants.
- The infants shall henceforth be known as KWL and AJL.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA ADOPTION CAUSE NO. 66 OF 2001
IN THE MATTER OF ADOPTION OF INFANTS ACT CAP. 143
L W AND AW (INFANT)
R U L I N G
Prior to the hearing of the adoption application, one Ann Marie Pruitt was appointed “a guardian ad litem” to the infants to be adopted. Subsequently the application for adoption was made by JLL and GLL
The two had filed a statement in support of the application for adoption. It is dated 7th June, 2001, it has 28 paragraphs which are self explanatory.
The applicants wished to adopt two infants baby LW and BAW records show that both infants were taken to New Life Home from Kenyatta National Hospital, where one was abandoned by the mother in the hospital after birth, but one was taken to the hospital after having been abandoned at Kawangware village, in the outskirts of Nairobi City. Because of these circumstances, I will dispense with the consent of the
natural parents of these infants because their identity is not known.
Both applicants addressed the court briefly and confirmed that they do not have children of their own. They took possession and custody of the 2 infants on 10th May, 2000 and 10th November, 2000 respectively. The 3 month statutory period of fostering under the Adoption Act had therefore been fulfilled.
The applicants are American citizens. They are both teachers and have been living in this country since July, 1999, and have received a new contract which runs upto the year 2004. They will therefore continue to live in this country.
Both applicants assured the court that they love the infants and have made provisions for them in terms of investments for the future. Further they stated that the matter of these children being black is not an issue because “they just wanted to give these children a home”.
They are aware of the fact that these infants could be discriminated against when they go back to the USA. For this reason they intend to talk to them and train them about this at an early age. Again they will have to be careful whilst selecting where to live in the USA, so as to protect the infants.
Glenda, the second applicant told court that she is currently giving the children her full attention and has had to stop work for the time being. She did not consider this a problem because they can live on her husband’s income and if they experience a short fall they can fall back on the income they have in the USA.
The applicant’s counsel appealed to the court to allow the 2 children to be adopted by the applicants who have already given them a home to grow up in.
Again Miss Gitau requested the court to authorize the adoption, though the applicants are of a different race from the infants. She argued that the adoption would be in the best interests of the infants who have already found a home of a couple who love them and want to care for them throughout their lives.
A report was prepared by the Children’s officer, Mrs. Ng’aru, who visited the home of the applicants where they live with the infants. Her report which is dated 25th July, 2001 is very detailed. She recommended adoption.
I have read through the statement prepared by the applicants, the report of the “guardian ad litem”, filed after appointment, and the oral evidence given by the applicants. From all this I came to the conclusion that the best interest of these infants would be best served if I authorized this adoption.
I therefore make an order allowing the applicants to adopt the infants who from now on will be known asKWL and AJL
Dated at Nairobi this 24th day of January, 2002.
JOYCE ALUOCH
HIGH COURT JUDGE