Genevieve Amen Munduru, a Ugandan expatriate who works with TotalEnergies in France, has been granted interim primary custody of her son by the court after a bitter dispute with her estranged husband, Hillary Masambu, over international travel arrangements for their child.
This comes after Masambu declined to grant a parental consent letter while Munduru and her child were travelling from Paris to Entebbe via Schiphol Airport in Amsterdam in October last year, leaving the mother and child stranded at the busy airport for 24 hours.
The couple is in the middle of divorce proceedings.
Justice Immaculate Busingye of the High Court’s Family Division said the welfare of the child had to come first as the couple continues battling the divorce case.
She partly allowed Munduru’s application and permitted her to continue travelling internationally with the child for work-related and welfare purposes.
The dispute arose from the collapse of the couple’s marriage and disagreements over custody and parental rights concerning their son.
Munduru lives and works in Paris, France, under an employment contract with TotalEnergies.
She said her work frequently requires her to travel across countries and that she usually travels with the child because she is his primary caregiver.
She accused Masambu of frustrating those travel arrangements by refusing to give parental consent required by immigration authorities during international travel.
Munduru said the Schiphol Airport incident caused financial losses through emergency accommodation, meals, and other expenses.
She also argued that the experience emotionally affected the child.
She further told the court that without interim relief, she would either be forced to resign from her job or leave the child with strangers whenever she travelled for work.
In response, Masambu denied that he had acted maliciously or unreasonably, telling the court that he remained an active father in the child’s life and had always maintained a close relationship with him.
Masambu argued that he had concerns about protecting his parental rights and ensuring the welfare and safety of the child.
He accused Munduru of repeatedly making major decisions involving the child without consulting him.
The father also feared that allowing Munduru unrestricted travel rights could permanently remove the child from his reach and weaken his relationship with the boy.
But Munduru’s lawyers argued that the law allows courts to grant interim custody where it is in the child’s best interests.
They said the Amsterdam airport incident demonstrated the emotional hardship caused by the conflict between the parents.
They also argued that Munduru had been the child’s constant caregiver and that the court should prioritise stability and continuity in the child’s upbringing.
Masambu accepted that while the child should remain with the mother during his tender years, Munduru should not sideline him from important parental decisions.
Masambu said his wife left their residence in Australia in 2023 before later relocating with the child to France without his consent.
His lawyers argued that she had approached the court with “unclean hands” because she herself had ignored Masambu’s parental rights while accusing him of frustrating travel arrangements.
The lawyers further warned that granting Munduru unfettered international travel rights could alienate the child from his father and undermine the court’s authority over future custody proceedings.
How a mix-up in court file numbers cost Hill Water Shs 45.8 million
In her ruling, Justice Busingye emphasised that courts handling custody disputes must always prioritise the child’s welfare above all else.
“Children are not capable of making decisions concerning them; any decisions made on their behalf must be made with caution and always in their best interests,” she ruled.
After reviewing evidence from both sides, she accepted that the child currently lives with Munduru in Paris and depends on her daily care and that Munduru’s job legitimately required international travel.
“In my view, exposing a child of such tender years to uncertainty, interrupted travel arrangements, and strained parental conflict is contrary to the child’s emotional welfare and stability,” Justice Busingye said.
However, she also agreed with Masambu that the father’s parental rights had to remain protected.
She therefore crafted a balanced temporary arrangement, allowing Munduru to keep custody of the child while also granting limited visitation rights to Masambu pending the final divorce decision.
Justice Bussingye stressed that the interim orders should not prejudice the final determination of custody and parental responsibility in the main divorce case.
