DIVORCE CASES.

Press, Volume XLIX, Issue 14661, 9 May 1913, Page 5

DIVORCE CASES.

QUESTION OF HEAR-INU

A recent cablegram from London stated that the House of Lords, on appeal, decided that the Divorce Court cannot sit in camera. A further message stated that the case arose through the Lower Court ruling that a principal in a nullity suit had been guilty of contempt of Court for publishing transcripts of an action heard in camera. The House of Lords reversed tho ruling. Haldano remarked that every Court of Justice must sit with open doors. In explanation of these messages, .Mr T. W. "Stringer, K.C., who was seen try a "Press" representative on tho subject, said that clauso bo of the Divorce Act of -New Zealand read: "The Uourt may, on the application of either tne •petitioner or tne respondent, or at its discretion, if it thinks it proper in the interests of public morals, hear and try any such suit or proceedings in _nambers, and may at all times in any suit or proceeding, whether beard and tried in Chambers or in open uourt, make an order forbidding the publication of any report or account of tbo evidence or other procedings therein, either as to the whole or any portion thereof; and tho breach of any such order, or any colourable or attempted evasion thercot, may be dealt with, as contempt or Court." That clause really covered the matter, so far as New Zealand was concerned. As long as a Judge was prepared to hold it was proper in tho interests of public morals that a divorco case should be heard in camera, ho bad statutory power to make such an order. That statutory power, however, was not given to the Judges in England, although it had been taken as good law that certain cases could be heard m camera. Lord Halsbury's work on tho Laws of England laid it down that the Judges of the Divorco Division sat ordinarily in open Court, although they had power inherited from tho Ecclesiastical Courts to sit in camera, a power which, so far as reported, appeared to havo been adopted only in cases of nullity of marriage for "incapacity. Apparently, added Mr Stringer, that could not bo taken now as good law. J\ew Zealand had adopted by statute what iv England had been treated as a practice of tho Courts, and apparently it was now decided that tliat practice was not a lawful practice. Continuing, Mr Stringer said that interlocutory matters, whether in divorce or in other jurisdictions, and such matters as were defined to be Chamber matters, still came before tho J udgo in Chambers, and wero heard in camera, and could not be reported. Judges were given power by tho Judicature Act, and tho rules mado therf undor to sit in Chambers —i.e., m camera, to deal with the class ot matters na_ed. Anything, however, in the nature of a trial, or what affected the status of parties, unless some statute expressly provided otherwise, must bo heard in open Court. For instance, in certain criminal cases, the Court can be cleared and the publication of evidence forbidden, but that was only by virtue of power conferred by Act of Parliament. Tho judgment given by the House of Lords did not affect Chamber matters at all, which still retained their ngut of being heard in camera.