[2004] KEHC 2482 (KLR)
The court found that although the biological mother’s consent was technically void for being given before the statutory six-week period, the Infant had been abandoned within the meaning of section 159(1)(a)(i) of the Children Act. No one had claimed the Infant since birth, and the Applicants had fostered and cared...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2004] KEHC 2482 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: R O – N; Applicant: G R; Respondent: C M M
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 30 of 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Adoption Cause / Judgment
- Outcome
- adoption granted
- Legal Topics
- Adoption Procedure, Child Abandonment, Consent to Adoption
- 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
R O – N
Applicant
G R
Applicant
C M M
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Adoption Cause / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Applicants meet the legal requirements to adopt the Infant under the Children Act.
- 2 Whether the consent to adoption given by the biological mother was valid under the statutory requirements.
- 3 Whether the adoption is in the best interests of the Infant.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that although the biological mother’s consent was technically void for being given before the statutory six-week period, the Infant had been abandoned within the meaning of section 159(1)(a)(i) of the Children Act. No one had claimed the Infant since birth, and the Applicants had fostered and cared for the Infant for a significant period. Reports from the Child Welfare Society of Kenya and the Children’s Department confirmed the Applicants’ suitability and the best interests of the Infant. The court was satisfied that all statutory requirements had been met and that the adoption would serve the welfare of the child. Accordingly, the court granted the adoption order,...
Court Disposition
adoption granted
Orders
- The Infant is adopted by the Applicants.
- The Infant shall be renamed PMRR.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
19 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
ADOPTION CAUSE NO 30 OF 2004
IN THE MATTER OF THE CHILDREN ACT
AND
IN THE MATTER OF BABY PAA
ALIAS P - INFANT
JUDGEMENT
On 30th January 2004 R O – N and GR(hereinafter called “the Applicants”) filed an application in this court by way of Originating Summons seeking inter-alia for orders to adopt an infant child known as PAA alias P(hereinafter called “the Infant”).
On 20th February 2004 Stephen Mukenya was duly appointed as guardian ad litem of the said Infant. When the said application for adoption came for hearing on 23rd July and 17th September 2004 the said guardian ad litem together with Linnet Ouna a Programme Officer with Child Welfare Society of Kenya and J.N. Ndungu(Mrs) a Chief Children’s Officer with the Children’s Department duly presented their respective reports on both the Applicants and the Infant.
The said Infant comes to this court having been born on 4th March 2002 out of a prohibited and incestuous relationship within the Luhya Community. At birth, the adult unmarried mother of the said Infant namely CMM, together with her family voluntarily surrendered and offered the said Infant for adoption. The said mother duly signed consent letters towards the said surrender and offer on 6th March 2002 and formally consented to the adoption of the said Infant through the office of the District Children’s Officer Vihiga District.
The said consent was nonetheless void as it was granted before the expiry of the statutory six weeks period but since to date no one has claimed the said Infant, the said Infant may accordingly be presumed and treated as having been abandoned as provided under section 159(1) (a) (i) of the Children Act.
The said Infant was immediately after birth admitted at the New Life Home Trust Kisumu, a child rescue centre, on the authority of the said District Children’s Officer and subsequently on 5th September 2003 transferred to the New Life Home Nairobi for medical treatment and commencement of fostering and adoption proceedings.
The said Infant was on 21st April 2003 fostered by the Applicants and has since remained in their good care and attention.
The Applicants are man and wife and are both Kenyan citizens. According to the reports filed, the said Applicants are fit and proper persons capable of adopting and providing due parental care and attention to the said Infant. The said Applicants and who solemnized their marriage on 8th July 1995 are by reason of unexplained medical complications unable to have their own biological children, and hence the desire to adopt. They have, according to the said filed reports bonded well with the Infant. In accordance with the said reports, the Applicants have duly complied with the applicable provisions of the Children Act( Act N0 8 of 2001). The said Infant also duly qualifies for adoption having been assessed and declared free for adoption by the Child Welfare Society of Kenya, a registered adoption society as provided under the said Act. The said registered adoption society has duly affirmed the authenticity of the said but void consent to adoption that were granted as aforesaid.
I have duly considered all the aforesaid reports together with the pleadings and submission filed herein. I am convinced that the adoption sought by the Applicants shall be in the best interests of the said Infant. In pursuance of the said application and including the provisions of section 159(1)(a)(i) of the aforesaid Act, I accordingly order that the said Infant be and is hereby adopted by the said Applicants. I further order that the said Infant be renamed PMRR henceforth and direct the Registrar-General to make appropriate entries in the Adopted Children Register accordingly.
DATED DELIVERED AND SIGNED AT NAIROBI this 8th day of
October, 2004.
P.J. KAMAU
AG JUDGE