[2025] KEHC 6981 (KLR)

[2025] KEHC 6981 (KLR)

The court found that the applicants failed to demonstrate sufficient grounds to warrant a stay of execution of the lower court's ruling. The trial magistrate had properly considered the statutory requirements under Section 102(3) of the Children Act, 2022, noting that the 4th applicant had not had actual custody of the minors for the requisite three-year period, but only about a month. The biological father, the respondent, is alive and willing to assume custody. Although the mother would ordinarily be preferred for custody of children of tender years, she had relocated abroad, leaving the children with her parents and sister. The court determined that there was no compelling reason to...

Citation
[2025] KEHC 6981 (KLR)
Parties
Appellant: Miriam Waithera Muriuki; Appellant: Joseph Muriuki Githinji; Appellant: Flora Wanjiru Muriuki; Appellant: Caroline Nyaguthii Mbuthia; Respondent: Charles Karia Mbuthia
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nyeri
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Judgment Date
29 May 2025
Case Number
Civil Appeal 43 of 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
Outcome
application for stay of execution dismissed
Judges
M Muya
Legal Topics
Child Custody, Parental Responsibility, Best Interests of Child, Custody Pending Appeal
Source Language
English
Family and Children Child Custody Parental Responsibility Best Interests of Child Custody Pending Appeal

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Miriam Waithera Muriuki

Appellant

Joseph Muriuki Githinji

Appellant

Flora Wanjiru Muriuki

Appellant

Caroline Nyaguthii Mbuthia

Appellant

Charles Karia Mbuthia

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Ruling on Application for Stay of Execution Pending Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants have established sufficient grounds for stay of execution of the lower court's ruling granting custody of the minors to the respondent pending appeal.
  2. 2 Whether the best interests of the children require a stay of execution of the custody order.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants failed to demonstrate sufficient grounds to warrant a stay of execution of the lower court's ruling. The trial magistrate had properly considered the statutory requirements under Section 102(3) of the Children Act, 2022, noting that the 4th applicant had not had actual custody of the minors for the requisite three-year period, but only about a month. The biological father, the respondent, is alive and willing to assume custody. Although the mother would ordinarily be preferred for custody of children of tender years, she had relocated abroad, leaving the children with her parents and sister. The court determined that there was no compelling reason to...

Court Disposition

application for stay of execution dismissed

Orders

  • The application for stay of execution is disallowed.
  • Costs in the cause.