REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MARSABIT
FAMILY MISC APP NO. E003 OF 2025
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY WARIO LOKHO
HALAKE TO BE APPOINTED AS GUARDIAN AD LITEM & LEGAL MANAGER OVER THE AFFAIRS OF THE ESTATE OF ABDULLAHI DUBA HALAKE
AND
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY
WARIO LOKHO HALAKE …..…......…..………….……………. PETITIONER
VERSUS
RAMADHAN ABDULLAHI…………….………...…..……. 1 st RESPONDENT
AMINA DUBA………………………………..…….………..2 nd RESPONDENT
RULING
A. Introduction
1. The Application before this court is the Notice of motion application dated 13.04.2026 brought pursuant to provisions of Order 45 Rule 1, and Order 51 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, and all other enabling provisions of law. The Applicant’s seeks for orders that this court be pleased to review and/or vary its ruling and orders issued on 25 th October 2025, and do issue an order granting the Applicant sole authority to operate account Number 1105371638 held at KCB Moyale and that costs of this Application be provided for.
2. The Application is supported by the grounds on the face of the said application and the supporting affidavit of the Applicant, Wario lokho Halake who depones that on 25 th October 2025 this court did issue orders, directing that both parties ( the applicant and 1 st respondent) to jointly operate account Number 1105371638 held at KCB Moyale, to the benefit of the Abdullahi Duba Halake ( the subject herein) , but unfortunately they had not been able to agree on management and operation of the said account, thereby rendering the said order impractical and unworkable, to the subject’s detriment as he was in need of continuous , specialized and costly medical attention.
3. Further their inability to operate the said account had also adversely affected the wellbeing of their two children, whose education, upkeep and general welfare depended on availability of funds from the said account and this prolonged standoff had effectively disrupted the children’s well-being and the subject’s health due to lack of timely access to the withheld funds.
4. It was therefore prudent and just that the earlier orders issued by varied strictly for purpose of utilizing the available funds for the purposes specified above, for which accounts would be rendered directly to court or other designated authority as may be directed. The respondent would also not suffer any prejudice should the said order be allowed.
5. The respondent despite being given ample opportunity did not file any response to the said Application.
B. ANALYSIS & DETERMINATION
6. I have carefully considered the Application, its supporting affidavit filed in support thereto. The only issue which arises for determination is whether proper grounds have been advanced to allow for review of the earlier orders issued on 25th October 2026.
7. Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 45 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure summarize the circumstances/conditions under which orders for review may be issued and they include where the applicant shows:
(a) discovery of new and important matter or evidence which after the exercise of due diligence, was not within the knowledge of the applicant or could not be produced by him at the time when the decree was passed or the order made or;
(b) on account of some mistake or error apparent on the face of the record,
(c) for any other sufficient reason desires to obtain a review of the decree or order may apply for a review of judgment to the court which passed the decree or made the order without unreasonable delay.
8. The applicant seeks review of the said orders on the basis that there is complete breakdown of communication and total disagreement between the parties herein as concerns management and control of KCB -Moyale Account Number 1105371638, where the subject receives his salary and the said amount is used to take care of his medical bill and to also sustain his family
9. It is my finding, that the applicant’s averment is not controverted in any manner and the court also takes judicial notice of the parties’ differences herein as previously pleaded by the parties and determined by this court. There thus exists sufficient reason to vary the previous order issued regarding how the said KCB Account would be run.
C. DISPOSTION
10. The Application dated 13 rd April 2026, therefore has merit and is allowed in terms of prayer (2) thereof.
11. The Applicant will use the funds obtained therefrom strictly for the purposes of meeting the subject’s medical expenses and providing for his needs and secondly to cater for the educational needs and upkeep of their children.
12. Further the Applicant will render accounts and file the same in court every 90 days.
13. It is so ordered.
Ruling written, dated and signed at Marsabit this …3 rd … day of JUNE, 2026.
FRANCIS RAYOLA OLEL
JUDGE
Delivered on the virtual platform, Teams this …3 rd …… day of JUNE, 2026.
In the presence of;
………Miss Odoyo…………….for Applicant
…………N/A……………………….for Respondent
……………JARSO…………………….Court Assistant
MARSABIT FAMILY MISC E003 OF 2025 Page 4
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MARSABIT
FAMILY MISC APP NO. E003 OF 2025
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY WARIO LOKHO
HALAKE TO BE APPOINTED AS GUARDIAN AD LITEM & LEGAL MANAGER OVER THE AFFAIRS OF THE ESTATE OF ABDULLAHI DUBA HALAKE
AND
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY
WARIO LOKHO HALAKE …..…......…..………….……………. PETITIONER
VERSUS
RAMADHAN ABDULLAHI…………….………...…..……. 1 st RESPONDENT
AMINA DUBA………………………………..…….………..2 nd RESPONDENT
RULING
A. Introduction
1. The Application before this court is the Notice of motion application dated 13.04.2026 brought pursuant to provisions of Order 45 Rule 1, and Order 51 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules, and all other enabling provisions of law. The Applicant’s seeks for orders that this court be pleased to review and/or vary its ruling and orders issued on 25 th October 2025, and do issue an order granting the Applicant sole authority to operate account Number 1105371638 held at KCB Moyale and that costs of this Application be provided for.
2. The Application is supported by the grounds on the face of the said application and the supporting affidavit of the Applicant, Wario lokho Halake who depones that on 25 th October 2025 this court did issue orders, directing that both parties ( the applicant and 1 st respondent) to jointly operate account Number 1105371638 held at KCB Moyale, to the benefit of the Abdullahi Duba Halake ( the subject herein) , but unfortunately they had not been able to agree on management and operation of the said account, thereby rendering the said order impractical and unworkable, to the subject’s detriment as he was in need of continuous , specialized and costly medical attention.
3. Further their inability to operate the said account had also adversely affected the wellbeing of their two children, whose education, upkeep and general welfare depended on availability of funds from the said account and this prolonged standoff had effectively disrupted the children’s well-being and the subject’s health due to lack of timely access to the withheld funds.
4. It was therefore prudent and just that the earlier orders issued by varied strictly for purpose of utilizing the available funds for the purposes specified above, for which accounts would be rendered directly to court or other designated authority as may be directed. The respondent would also not suffer any prejudice should the said order be allowed.
5. The respondent despite being given ample opportunity did not file any response to the said Application.
B. ANALYSIS & DETERMINATION
6. I have carefully considered the Application, its supporting affidavit filed in support thereto. The only issue which arises for determination is whether proper grounds have been advanced to allow for review of the earlier orders issued on 25th October 2026.
7. Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 45 Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure summarize the circumstances/conditions under which orders for review may be issued and they include where the applicant shows:
(a) discovery of new and important matter or evidence which after the exercise of due diligence, was not within the knowledge of the applicant or could not be produced by him at the time when the decree was passed or the order made or;
(b) on account of some mistake or error apparent on the face of the record,
(c) for any other sufficient reason desires to obtain a review of the decree or order may apply for a review of judgment to the court which passed the decree or made the order without unreasonable delay.
8. The applicant seeks review of the said orders on the basis that there is complete breakdown of communication and total disagreement between the parties herein as concerns management and control of KCB -Moyale Account Number 1105371638, where the subject receives his salary and the said amount is used to take care of his medical bill and to also sustain his family
9. It is my finding, that the applicant’s averment is not controverted in any manner and the court also takes judicial notice of the parties’ differences herein as previously pleaded by the parties and determined by this court. There thus exists sufficient reason to vary the previous order issued regarding how the said KCB Account would be run.
C. DISPOSTION
10. The Application dated 13 rd April 2026, therefore has merit and is allowed in terms of prayer (2) thereof.
11. The Applicant will use the funds obtained therefrom strictly for the purposes of meeting the subject’s medical expenses and providing for his needs and secondly to cater for the educational needs and upkeep of their children.
12. Further the Applicant will render accounts and file the same in court every 90 days.
13. It is so ordered.
Ruling written, dated and signed at Marsabit this …3 rd … day of JUNE, 2026.
FRANCIS RAYOLA OLEL
JUDGE
Delivered on the virtual platform, Teams this …3 rd …… day of JUNE, 2026.
In the presence of;
………Miss Odoyo…………….for Applicant
…………N/A……………………….for Respondent
……………JARSO…………………….Court Assistant
MARSABIT FAMILY MISC E003 OF 2025 Page 4