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

HGG v GGG (Divorce Cause 46 of 2018) [2018] KEKC 38 (KLR) (12 November 2018) (Ruling)

[2018] KEKC 38 (KLR) KEKC
Read PDF
Court
KEKC
Case number
38
Citation
[2018] KEKC 38 (KLR)
Decided
12 November 2018
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeDivorcePostureApplication for custody and maintenance of children and restraining orderCoramRoxburgh
Holding

The court orders the defendant to return the children to the plaintiff and restrains the defendant from evicting the plaintiff from the matrimonial home.

Facts

The parties were married under Islamic law in 2004 and divorced in 2017. The defendant, a police officer, left the plaintiff and took the children to Nairobi. The plaintiff claims the defendant is violent and abusive, and threatens to evict her from the matrimonial home.

Issues

  1. custody and maintenance of the children
  2. whether or not the respondent should be restrained from evicting the applicant from the matrimonial home

Reasoning

The court considers the best interests of the children and upholds the mother's priority in custody, given the children's young age and the defendant's lack of employment and financial stability.

Outcome

The defendant is ordered to return the children to the plaintiff and is restrained from evicting her from the matrimonial home.

Orders

  • The defendant is ordered to return the children to the plaintiff

Remedies

  • Restraint from evicting the plaintiff from the matrimonial home

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Article 53(2) of the Constitution of Kenya (2010)
  • Section 83(1) of the Children's Act, Cap 141 laws of Kenya
Cases cited (3)
  • Mehrunisa v Pravez (1982-88) 1 KAR 18
  • Githunguri v Githunguri [1979] eKLR
  • Re S (an infant) [1958] 1 All ER 783
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 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case