A separated father receives a demand letter. His ex-wife is asking for KSh 150,000 per month in child support—school fees, transport, clothing, medical bills, and more. Meanwhile, she earns almost the same salary as him.
Can one parent be forced to carry the entire financial burden while the other contributes almost nothing?
This question is why the landmark 2025 High Court ruling in JNM v LGM has reshaped family law in Kenya. The court delivered a powerful message: "The law does not intend to turn one parent into an ATM."
For separated parents facing inflated demands and lawyers advising on maintenance disputes, understanding this ruling is essential.
What Is Shared Parental Responsibility? (Simple Definition)
In plain language: both parents must contribute to raising their children—financially and otherwise—based on their individual abilities.
It does not mean a strict 50:50 split. It means a proportionate contribution reflecting each parent's actual financial capacity.
The old thinking—that fathers pay and mothers care—is officially outdated. Kenya's Constitution and recent court rulings affirm that parental responsibility is a joint duty, regardless of gender.
Legal Basis: The Constitution and the Children Act
In Kenya, parental responsibility is anchored in:
· Article 53(2) of the Constitution – The best interests of the child are of paramount importance in every matter concerning them.
· The Children Act, 2022 – Both parents have equal parental responsibility, whether they are married to each other or not.
The duty to maintain a child is not optional. It encompasses provision for food, shelter, clothing, education, and medical care.
The Landmark Case: "The ATM Ruling" (December 2025)
Case: JNM v LGM [2025] KEHC 1617 (KLR)
The Facts
The case involved two medical professionals earning nearly identical salaries. After separation, the mother moved with their two children from Kilimani to Ongata Rongai, significantly increasing school transport costs.
A lower court ordered the father to cover almost all expenses, including school fees, transport, and clothing. The mother's financial contribution was minimal.
The father appealed, arguing he was being unfairly punished financially for decisions he never made.
The Court's Decision
Justice Helene Namisi agreed with the father and delivered a ruling that sent shockwaves through family courts nationwide.
"The law does not intend to turn one parent into an ATM."
The judge ruled that:
1. Both parents must contribute fairly based on their means
2. Joint legal custody remains with both parents—the outdated "tender years" doctrine was firmly rejected
3. Personal decisions have financial consequences—the mother's unilateral move increased costs, and she bore responsibility
The Practical Breakdown
Father's Responsibility
Mother's Responsibility
School fees and related costs (lunch, activity fees)
Daily school transport and clothing during her custody
Medical insurance for both children
Medical insurance for both children
Transport costs during his access periods
School holidays shared equally
Does This Ruling Apply to All Separated Parents?
Yes—this ruling sets a binding precedent for all Kenyan courts handling child maintenance disputes.
However, each case depends on its specific facts, including:
· Both parents' incomes and financial capacity
· Custody arrangements
· The child's needs and best interests
· Whether one parent's decisions have increased costs
Conflicting Views? Understanding the Shift
Before this ruling, many courts routinely ordered fathers to pay the lion's share of child-related expenses, even when mothers had comparable incomes.
This created a culture where:
· Fathers felt like "ATMs" rather than parents
· Mothers felt entitled to financial support without proportional contribution
· Children's best interests were overshadowed by gender stereotypes
The JNM v LGM ruling corrects this imbalance by emphasizing fairness and shared responsibility.
Summary Table: What Has Changed?
Before 2025
After the "ATM" Ruling
Fathers often ordered to pay most expenses
Both parents contribute based on financial capacity
"Tender years" doctrine favored mothers
Joint legal custody is the norm
Mother's unilateral decisions rarely questioned
Courts consider who caused additional costs
Maintenance often gender-based
Maintenance is needs-based and capacity-based
What Separated Parents Should Do
If you are separated or divorcing, consider the following:
1. Document your income and expenses – Courts need clear evidence of both parents' financial capacity
2. Share custody fairly – Joint legal custody is the default position under Kenyan law
3. Communicate before making major decisions – Unilateral moves can have financial consequences
4. Consider mediation – Family disputes are often better resolved through negotiation than litigation
5. Formalize agreements – Verbal arrangements can lead to disputes. Get court orders or consent agreements in writing
What Lawyers Should Know
For legal practitioners advising on maintenance disputes:
1. The "ATM" ruling is now binding precedent – Cite it in your submissions
2. Challenge gendered assumptions – Courts no longer assume fathers should pay more
3. Proportional contribution is key – Focus on each parent's actual financial capacity
4. Question unilateral decisions – If one parent caused additional costs, they may bear responsibility
5. Consider alternative dispute resolution – Mediation is increasingly encouraged in family matters
Recent Related Rulings
Case 1: WMM v MWK (February 2026)
Citation: WMM v MWK (Civil Appeal E165 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 950 (KLR) (Family) (2 February 2026) (Judgment)
The High Court dismissed a father's appeal against a monthly maintenance order of KSh 50,000. The court emphasized that formal orders for custody, access, and maintenance are necessary when parents are separated and in different jurisdictions.
Key Takeaway: Proper legal documentation protects both parents and ensures children's needs are met.
Case 2: S I U v B A A (June 2026)
Citation: S I U v B A A (Civil Appeal E908 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 9440 (KLR) (Civ) (23 June 2026) (Ruling)
The father argued that KSh 20,000 monthly maintenance was excessive given his take-home pay of KSh 47,660. The court considered his actual financial capacity, including his salary and liabilities, when addressing the maintenance order.
Key Takeaway: Courts are now examining actual financial capacity, not just assuming fathers can pay whatever is demanded.
The Best Interests of the Child: The Overriding Principle
All these rulings are anchored in one constitutional principle:
"The best interests of the child are of paramount
importance in every matter concerning them."
— Article 53(2), Constitution of Kenya
The courts are not letting parents off the hook. They are simply ensuring that:
· Children receive adequate support
· Parents contribute fairly
· No parent is unfairly burdened while the other contributes minimally
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: Does this mean fathers no longer have to pay child support?
A: No. Both parents must contribute. The ruling ensures contributions are fair and proportionate, not that fathers pay nothing.
Q: What if one parent earns significantly more?
A: The higher-earning parent will contribute more—but proportionately. The key is fairness, not equality.
Q: Can the mother still get full custody?
A: Joint legal custody is now the norm. The "tender years" doctrine is outdated. Courts consider the child's best interests, not gender.
Q: What if my ex-partner refuses to contribute?
A: You can apply to the court for maintenance orders. The court will assess both parents' financial capacity and make appropriate orders.
Q: Does this ruling affect existing maintenance orders?
A: Existing orders remain valid unless challenged. However, you can apply for variation if circumstances have changed.
Seeking Legal Advice on Maintenance Disputes
Given the evolving case law and the importance of proper documentation, both parents benefit from professional legal guidance.
A legal review can assess:
· What maintenance amount is fair and proportionate
· Whether a demand is inflated or legally enforceable
· What arguments are available under the Children Act and Constitution
· Whether mediation or court action is appropriate
For legal guidance on family matters, child custody, or maintenance disputes, you may contact:
Duncan Cheruiyot Advocates
📍 Office: Luxor Towers, Biashara Street
📞 Phone: 0799689 903
📧 Email: legal@duncancheruiyotadvocates.com | Info@duncancheruiyotadvocates.com
💬 WhatsApp: Consultation requests accepted
🌐 Website: https://dunnew.vercel.app/
References
1. JNM v LGM [2025] KEHC 1617 (KLR) – The "ATM" Ruling
2. WMM v MWK (Civil Appeal E165 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 950 (KLR) (Family) (2 February 2026) (Judgment)
3. S I U v B A A (Civil Appeal E908 of 2025) [2026] KEHC 9440 (KLR) (Civ) (23 June 2026) (Ruling)
4. Article 53(2), Constitution of Kenya, 2010
5. The Children Act, 2022
