Automated Summary
Key Facts
The Petitioner (BOOvM) and Respondent (M A O) were married on May 3, 1996, in Narok under the Marriage Act, having cohabited since May 1994. They have one child, J O O (born 1997). The Petitioner alleges sustained cruelty by the Respondent, including physical assaults, threats to burn their home (1997), public abuse, and an incident in 2007 where the Respondent hit him with a soiled sanitary towel. The marriage is deemed irretrievably broken, and the court dissolves it but denies custody of the child to the Petitioner, as the child has remained with the Respondent post-separation without evidence of harm.
Issues
- The court evaluated whether the marriage between the Petitioner and Respondent had irretrievably broken down due to cruelty under the Marriage Act, including incidents of assault, threats, and public abuse by the Respondent.
- The court considered the petitioner's request for custody of their child, J O O, under customary law, and determined that the child's safety was not compromised by the respondent's care post-separation.
Holdings
- The court declined to grant the petitioner custody of their child, noting the child has been under the respondent's care since separation with no allegations of harm. The petitioner may pursue custody in the children's court if necessary.
- The court determined that the marriage between the petitioner and respondent has irretrievably broken down due to cruelty and dissolved it. The marriage was celebrated on 3rd May 1996 at the Narok District Commissioner's Office.
Remedies
- The court dissolved the marriage between the petitioner and respondent celebrated on May 3, 1996, at the Narok District Commissioner's office.
- The court made no order as to cost in this case.
- The court declined to grant the petitioner custody of their child, who has been under the respondent's care since separation. The petitioner may pursue custody in the children's court if necessary.
Legal Principles
The court applied the principle that cruelty is a recognized ground for divorce under the Marriage Act, as outlined in the petitioner's allegations and the judge's dissolution of the marriage.
Cited Statute
Marriage Act
Judge Name
R. E OUGO
Passage Text
- In the year 2007 the respondents attacked the petitioner in front of their child and hit him with her soiled sanitary towels. In most cases, the daughter intervened when the respondent attacked and/or abused the petitioner.
- It is evident that the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent has irretrievably broken down. The petitioner narrated incidents of cruelty during their marriage. Cruelty is one of the grounds provided for under the Marriage Act. I therefore dissolve the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent that was celebrated at the Narok District Commissioner's Office on the 3rd of May 1996.
- The said child has been under the care of the respondent since their separation and no issue of cruelty against the child has arisen to take the child away from her. The petitioner is however at liberty to follow up the issue of custody of the child at the children's court if need be.