Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

SUPREME COURT

UNDEFENDED DIVORCE PETITIONS A decree nisi, on the grounds stated, was granted the petitioner m each of the following undefended petitions for.divorce heard before Mr Justice Northcroft in the Supreme Court yesterday:— Failure to comply with decree for restitution of conjugal rights: Iris Gwendoline Teesdale (Mr W. R. Lascalles) v. Basu Fl Adultery! d James Robert Cleghorn (Mr B J. Drake) v. Natalie Ngaire Cleghorn and Geoffrey Brailsford, named as corespondent: Francis Arthur Shepherd (Dr. A L. Haslam) v. Maureen Beatrice Shepherd and Selwyn Erl Taylor, named as co-respondent; Mary Ellen Ivy Harpur (Mr H. W. Thompson) v. John Thomas Harpur; Marion Isobel Seaward (Mr R. A. Young) v. George Douglas Seaward; Violet May Barnard (Mr E. M. Hay) v. Cecil Claud Austen Barnard. Habitual inebriety: Leonard Frank King (Mr E. M. Hay) v. Doreen May King. Separation: Thursa Evelyn Victoria Sugden (Mr R. C. Saunders) v. Frank Sugden: Hilda Helen Forrest (Mr S. R- Caere) v. John Forrest; May Irene Tolchard (Mr H. M. S. Dawson) v. Sidney Roy Tolchard; Joseph Saunders (Mr R. A. Young) v. Violet May Saunders. , ... Desertion: Douglas John Campbell (Mr R. A. Young) v. Alison Nicholson Campbell; Lillian Rose Gobbe (Mr E. M. Hay) v. Albert Edward Gobbe. Judicial Separation

Henrietta Alice Newell (Mr E. M. Hay) petitioned for judicial separation from Seth Jelly Newell on the grounds of his adultery. An order was made for judicial separation.

Restitution of Conjugal Rights An order for restitution of conjugal rights was granted to Arthur Edward Allan (Mr R. C. Saunders) against Beverley Mary Allan; and to Elspie Beilby (Mr B. J. Drake) against Reginald Edgar Beilby.

BIGAMOUS MARRIAGE ANNULLED

A petition by Maude Frances Dando, otherwise Guy (Mr D. H. Godfrey), for a decree annulling her bigamous marriage to Leonard Marsh Dando, was granted by Mr Justice Northcroft in the Supreme Court yesterday. The petition stated that the petitioner went through a form of marriage with Dando at Timaru. on May 8, 1934. On January 30, 1917, she married George Millner Guy at Nottingham, England, and when she went through the form of marriage with Dando her husband, Guy, had been and still was alive.

“In 1919 Mr Guy and I came to New Zealand and we were in many places and various jobs until August, 1923, said the petitioner in evidence. “I went to Nelson from Wellington at this time, and Mr Guy said he would get a job on a coastal boat. I received a telegram from Mr Guy saying he was leaving New Zealand by the ship Port Chalmers. I did not. see or hear from or have any knowledge of the existence of Mr Guy from the time we parted in Wellington about August, 1923, until about two years and a half ago when my daughter, Edith, wrote to me saying that Mr Guy had advertised for her whereabouts." Some months after she received the telegram from Mr Guy she met Mr Dando and they lived together until May 8, 1934, when they went through a form of marriage in the Registry Office at Timaru. “Mr Cummings, of the Child Welfare Department at Timaru, was trying to get us together, and advised us to get married, as he felt that would have a better effect on Mr Dando," said the petitioner. "I said I was already married to Mr Guy, but Mr Cummings said that, as I had not seen or-heard from Mr Guy for over seven years, I could marry Mr Dando. When I married Mr Guy in. 1917 I was a widow, my first husband having died on active service in the First World War.”

Mr Guy had petitioned for divorce from hpr on December 12, 1951, at Wellington, and the decree nisi had been made absolute since then, she said. Mr Godfrey submitted that the petitioner was entitled to her decree. His Honour said it seemed something of a legal oddity that a bigamist should appear in Court to have the bigamous marriage annulled. Mr Godfrey quoted legal authorities in suoport of his submission and his Honour said the petitioner was entitled to her decree of nullity.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19521022.2.129

Bibliographic details

Press, Volume LXXXVIII, Issue 26868, 22 October 1952, Page 11

Word Count
691

SUPREME COURT Press, Volume LXXXVIII, Issue 26868, 22 October 1952, Page 11

SUPREME COURT Press, Volume LXXXVIII, Issue 26868, 22 October 1952, Page 11