IS NOT VOID.

Auckland Star, Volume LXVIII, Issue 280, 25 November 1937, Page 15

IS NOT VOID.

WIFE'S ALLOWANCE.

ANOTHER MAN'S PROMISE.

« PUBLIC POLICY" QUESTION.

A wife's allowance from another man during her husband's absence in New Zealand was found tb be not "against public policy," in the King's Bench Division, London.

Mr. Justice Lewis gave judgment on a preliminary point of law in an action in which Mrs. Mae Alice Davies sued Mr. Allan Melrose Elmslie.

He held that Mr. Elmslie had not satisfied him that the agreement to pay the allowance was void. Judgment was entered for Mrs. Davies on the preliminary issue, with costs.

The statement of claim alleged, according to counsel, that in January, 1936, Mrs. Davies and Mr. Elmslie entered into an agreement whereby, in consideration of Mrs. Davies persuading her husband to go to >iew Zealand and her consenting to forego the consortium of her husband, Mr. Elinslie. promised to pay her an allowance of £4 a week until either he paid her passage to Xew Zealand to enable her to rejoin her husband or paid her husband's passage back to England. Claimed Arreari. Mr*. Davies alleged that Mr. Elmslie ceased to pay the allowance on January 12. 1937, and she claimed £32 arrears and a declaration that she w«i« entitled to payments an agreed.

Mr. R. A. Willes, for Mr. Elmslie, liad contended Hint such an agree men t was against public policy.

(Jiving judgment, Mr. Justice Lewis pointed out that he wjia not entitled to jro outside what appeared on the record, or to inquire into the motive which actuated the parties in making the agreement.

"Aβ pleaded, • the contract may be interpreted as being in no ways contrary to public policy but, on the other hand, it may have a very sinister significance," said Mr. Justice Lewis.

"It seems to me that, having no evidence before me as to the motive which actuated the parties in making this agreement, I must come to the conelusion that the proper view for me to take is to say that the defendant ba« not satisfied me that this agreement is against public policy. "I can only infer that the wife, at all events, has no desire to live apart from her husband, and, in these circumstances, the , issue must be decided in her favour, with costs." Leave to appeal was granted.