SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

C F B v M O [2013] KEHC 5 (KLR)

[2013] KEHC 5 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
5
Citation
[2013] KEHC 5 (KLR)
Decided
19 December 2013
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeDivorcePosturePetitioner seeks dissolution of marriage, respondent cross-petitions for dissolution, custody, maintenance, and division of matrimonial property.CoramW MUSYOKA
Holding

The court dissolves the marriage and issues a decree nisi, with the consent orders regarding custody, maintenance, and division of property governing the remaining issues.

Facts

Petitioner and respondent were married in 1996 and have two children. The petitioner filed a petition for dissolution of marriage in 2012, alleging desertion by the respondent. The respondent filed an answer and amended her pleadings, alleging desertion by the petitioner.

Issues

  1. Dissolution of marriage
  2. Custody of children
  3. Maintenance
  4. Division of matrimonial property

Reasoning

The court finds that the marriage has irretrievably broken down due to the parties' long separation and lack of conjugal connection. The court also finds that the petitioner deserted the respondent.

Outcome

Dissolution of marriage

Orders

  • Decree nisi issued
  • Consent orders regarding custody, maintenance, and division of property to govern remaining issues
  • Respondent to have costs of the suit

Remedies

  • Dissolution of marriage
  • Joint custody of children
  • Equal access to children
  • Maintenance for children and respondent
  • Division of matrimonial property
  • Costs awarded to respondent

Authorities cited

Legislation (1)
  • Marriage Act, 1949
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.1 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case