Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Original judgment

High Court 3084 of 2013

REPUBLIC OF KENYA High Court at Nairobi (Nairobi Law Courts) Adoption Cause 47 of 2013 IN THE MATTER OF THE CHILDREN’S ACT (NO. 8 OF 2001) AND IN THE MATTER OF BABY A. alias M. N. M. (MINOR) JUDGEMENT The applicants, L. H. P. and I. L. C., are a married Belgian couple. They have brought an Originating Summons dated 5th March 2013 seeking permission to adopt Baby A. alias M. N. M. Baby A. alias M. N. M., the subject of these adoption proceedings, is an abandoned male child. He was born at the Kenyatta National Hospital on 30th July 2012, where he was abandoned by his birth mother. A report of the abandonment was made at the Kenyatta Police Post and efforts to trace the parents were not fruitful. The Children’s Court later committed him to the [information withheld], Nairobi, from where he was placed with the applicants on 1 st December 2012. There is sufficient documentation which supports this background prepared by and filed in court on 8th March 2013 by [information withheld] dated 24th October 2012. The [information withheld] freed the child for adoption by their certificate dated 24 th October 2012. To facilitate the adoption the applicant has been assessed by, [information withheld], the guardian ad litem, R. M. N., and the Director of Children’s Services. All these agencies have compiled and filed their reports in court dated 7th March 2013, 2nd April 2013 and 12th April 2013, respectively. There is also an international adoption home study report by the Public Prosecutor’s Office, Hasselt, Belgium, dated 15 th November 2011. All these reports are favourable and recommend the proposed adoption. The applicants have demonstrated that they have the financial and emotional capability and capacity to take care of the child. The child appears to have bonded well with the applicants and considers them to be his parents. This proposed adoption has been approved by Hasselt District Juvenile Court, in accordance with the Belgian law. The approval is dated 22nd November 2011. The Het Kleine Mirakel, a Belgian foreign adoption agency, by their undertaking dated 16th January 2012, confirms that an adoption order of a Kenyan court would be recognised in Belgium and the child so adopted given resident status. The proposed adoption has also received local approval through the National Adoption Committee of Kenya, which has issued a certificate dated 17 th October 2012. In the opinion of this court it would be in the interests of the child that the child is adopted by the applicants. The applicants will be able to provide a home and a family for the child to grow up in and thereafter be a useful member of the family. Consequently, the applicants shall assume all parental rights and duties of the biological parents in respect of the adopted child; they shall treat the adopted child as if

page 1 of 2

he was born to them. The applicants have been made aware that once the adoption order is made it shall be final and binding during the lifetime of the child and that the child shall have the right to inherit their property. The applicants cannot give up the child owing to any subsequent unforeseen behaviour or other changes in the child. I am satisfied that all the legal requirements have been met. The court allows the applicants’ application to adopt the child. The applicants, L. H. P. and I. L. C., are hereby allowed to adopt the child, Baby A. alias M. N. M., who shall be hereafter known as N. A. S. C. P. I. M. W. is hereby appointed the legal guardian of the child should misfortune befall the applicants. The Registrar-General is directed to enter this adoption order in the adoption register. The guardian ad litem is hereby discharged. DATED, SIGNED and DELIVERED at NAIROBI this 17th DAY OF May, 2013. W. MUSYOKA JUDGE

page 2 of 2

A note on accuracy. These pages are generated automatically from our AI-written case briefs and have not been checked by a lawyer. Case titles and citations come from Kenya Law; the counts, topics, propositions and “treatment” labels are derived from the briefs and can be incomplete or wrong. Use them as a research aid and always read the original judgment before relying on anything here. This is not legal advice.