- If he fails he will be committed to civil jail for 30 days and the woman will be responsible for his daily subsistence.
- I.S. failed to fully adhere to a consent judgment that was adopted by Justice Antony Mrima between him and the woman.
Image: FILE
A man who stopped paying Sh80,000 monthly upkeep for his unborn child with his estranged lover risks a one-month jail term if he fails to pay all arrears within two weeks.
The arrears are as at the time she filed the contempt of court application in May 2022, which was four months.
In the case, N.E.W had moved to court last year saying she needed monthly upkeep for her unborn baby that she had conceived with the man I.S.
In a ruling delivered on June 12, High Court deputy registrar TE Marienga ordered the man to pay the woman the arrears of the consent judgment within 15 days.
If he fails he will be committed to civil jail for 30 days and the woman will be responsible for his daily subsistence.
According to court, I.S. has failed to fully adhere to a consent judgment that was adopted by Justice Antony Mrima between him and the woman.
When the woman sued him, the man voluntarily entered into a consent with the woman who was pregnant then and agreed to be paying her Sh80,000 as upkeep for the unborn child.
In the consent agreement between lawyer Danstan Omari for the woman and man’s lawyers, he agreed to pay her for upkeep and the matter was withdrawn
The man agreed that he would pay a one-off settlement of Sh250,000 for all expenses incurred by the woman since conception of the child.
At the time the woman was towards the end of her second trimester and they both agreed she would have full custody, care and control of the unborn child.
He also undertook to take an annual medical cover for the mother and the child for inpatient and Sh50,000 for outpatient.
He said he would be making monthly upkeep of Sh80,000 as upkeep for the child on or before 5th of every month.
He partially adhered to consent judgement wherein he paid her for a few months but later stopped all payment in January 2022, which led the woman to sue him for disobeying the court orders.
The man paid her Sh250,000 one-off payment and made several monthly payments of Sh 80,000 before he abruptly stopped.
The woman told court that the father of her baby had refused to comply with the orders of the court that were adopted from the consent they entered with their lawyers.
However, in his defence I.S told court that he had not refused to pay claiming his business had been affected by Covid and asked the court to allow review so that he could be paying Sh40,000 instead of Sh80,000 until his business picked up.
He said he had a lot of expenditure that included house and office rent, salaries for staff, school fees, parental support, medical costs, siblings support, loan repayments among others.
He claimed that he only remained with a balance of Sh100,000 and he could only avail Sh40,000 from that for upkeep.
He also argued that the woman was employed and earned a decent salary so she was able to take care of the minor as he revived his businesses.
The court declined to vary the amount as had been asked, saying that could only be done if the two re-negotiated the earlier terms.
“It is therefore evident that the respondent is in breach of the consent judgment dated May 18, 2022,” the court ruled.
It was also noted that the man had an opportunity to pay his proposed Sh40,000 since January but he had failed to do so.
“Also, there is no evidence provided as proof of his expenditure. This is not in the best interest of the subject minor, which is paramount as provided in law,” the court ruled.
In her case before the consent was entered, the woman had claimed that she had a short intimate relationship with the man from January to March 2021 that led to her getting pregnant.
She claimed that they broke up after he became violent towards her and accused her of cheating on him.
When he found out she was pregnant he allegedly told her to terminate it as he did not want a child with her but she decided to keep it despite his constant threats and lack of emotional and financial support.
At the time, she told court that she needed child upkeep for her unborn child due to being unemployed and her stress levels due as a result of emotional turmoil having gone through the pregnancy alone.