REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI ADOPTION CAUSE NO. 155 OF 2015(O.S) IN THE MATTER OF THE CHILDREN ACT AND IN THE MATTER OF BABY JN ALIAS JH BJM …………………………APPLICANT RULING On 26th June, 2015 by an application dated 15 th June, 2015 this Court was presented and filed on the same date; with an application for appointment of guardian ad litem of proposed MMM in the adoption proceedings of BABY Particulars withheld The Court was also to direct the DIRECTOR OF CHILDREN SERVICES to make the necessary evaluation and reports. The Court granted the orders of the two (2) applications. Counsel for the adoption report brought to the attention of the Court two (2) issues; a. That the Applicant Particulars withheld is a single mother of a daughter EMS wants to adopt a baby boy Particulars withheld The Applicant was approved vide letter dated 14th October, 2014 and Certificate from the Adoption Committee onn21st October, 2014. b. The Court order that the Director of Children Services will be hampered by a letter from the Principal Secretary Ministry of Labour to the effect that the Director of Children Service should not deal with inter county adoptions and then seeks the Court to disapprove with this requirement. The Court finds that at this preliminary stage the adoption proceedings should proceed and the matter regarding Section 158(1) and (2) and Section 162(f) of the Children’s Act Cap 2001 shall be canvassed at the next stage of the adoption proceedings. The Director of Children Services to prepare a report. In case of any problem the way forward to be provided by Head of Family Division as administratively charged with the ongoing deliberations. READ AND SIGNED IN OPEN COURT AT NAIROBI THIS 28TH DAY OF JULY 2015. M. MUIGAI JUDGE In the presence of: Ms. Ouga holding brief for Ms. Mbanya for the Applicant
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.