[2005] KEHC 3312 (KLR)
The court found that the petitioner had proved, on a balance of probabilities, that the marriage had irretrievably broken down due to cruelty, neglect, and abandonment by the respondent. There was no evidence of collusion. The court was satisfied that the petitioner should be granted a decree of divorce. The...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2005] KEHC 3312 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: N S; Respondent: T S S
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Divorce Cause 147 of 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Divorce Cause / Judgment
- Outcome
- petition allowed; marriage dissolved
- Legal Topics
- Divorce, Custody of Children, Matrimonial Breakdown
- 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
N S
Applicant
T S S
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Divorce Cause / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the petitioner has proved grounds for dissolution of marriage under Kenyan law.
- 2 Whether the petitioner is entitled to custody of the minor children.
- 3 Whether the respondent should be ordered to pay school fees for the children.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the petitioner had proved, on a balance of probabilities, that the marriage had irretrievably broken down due to cruelty, neglect, and abandonment by the respondent. There was no evidence of collusion. The court was satisfied that the petitioner should be granted a decree of divorce. The petitioner, having had custody of the minor children, was granted continued custody, with the respondent to have access as arranged. The respondent was ordered to continue paying school fees for the children, reflecting the court's consideration of the children's welfare and the parties' respective roles.
Court Disposition
petition allowed; marriage dissolved
Orders
- Decree of divorce granted dissolving the marriage solemnized on 28th December 1990.
- Decree nisi to remain in force for 3 months.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
25 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE H IGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
Divorce Cause 147 of 2004
N S……..…………………………………………….PETITIONER VERSUS T S S……………………………………………….RESPONDENT
JUDGEMENT
The Petitioner herein N S sought for an order of dissolution of the marriage that was solemnized on the 28th day of December 1990 between her and the Respondent T S S before the Office of the Registrar of Marriages, Nairobi.
Upon marriage the couple cohabited as husband and wife at the following principal places:
a) Hurligham, Kwifra Estate House No. 18 (from 1990 up to January 2002)
b) Riverside Road Apartments, Riverside Drive (from January 2002 to April 2002)
c) Hurligham Kwifra Estate House No. 18 (from September 2002 up to March 2004).
There are two issues of the said marriage namely:
(a) A.S. born on 13/8/91
(b) R.S. born on the 15th April 1997
This petition was certified as undefended case on 26th May 2005 when the Registrar’s certificate to that effect was issued.
During the hearing the Petitioner gave evidence in support of the petition and gave a detailed account of incidents of cruelty, neglect and abandonment by the Respondent that characterized their relationship.
The Petitioner reiterated the particulars of cruelty as contained in paragraph 7 of the petition. According to the petitioner the marriage is irretrievably broken down and there is no likelihood of reconciliation. Due to these persistent disagreements, quarrels and acts of cruelty the Petitioner was forced to separate from the Respondent who absented himself from the matrimonial home from the year 2001 hence making cohabitation impossible. The Petitioner maintained that she has not brought this petition through collusion but for irreconcilable differences. She has had the custody of the two minor children but prayed for an order that the Respondent should continue to pay the school fees for the children.
I have carefully considered the Petitioner’s evidence as well as the pleadings filed herein. In the absence of any evidence to controvert the Petitioner’s evidence, I am fully satisfied that the Petitioner has proved her case to the required standard and that this petition was not presented or prosecuted in collusion with the Respondent.
Accordingly, I hereby pronounce the decree of divorce and dissolve the marriage that was solemnized on 28th day of December 1990.
The decree nisi shall remain in force for a period of 3 months.
The Petitioner shall nave the custody of the two minor children while the Respondent shall have access as should be arranged between the parties.
The Respondent shall continue to pay school fees for the children and each party will be at liberty to apply.
It is so ordered.
Judgment read and signed on 30/9/05
MARTHA KOOME
JUDGE