DIVORCE.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 339, 28 October 1908, Page 10

DIVORCE.

A PALMERSTON NORTH SUIT. MARRIAGE DISSOLVED. Before Mr. Justice Chapman yesterday, a Syrian named Assad Bailout, of Palmerston North,'hawker,- applied for the dissolution of his marriage with Caroline Bailout on the ground of desertion for upwards of five years. . Mr. Cooper, of Palmerston North, appeared on behalf of the petitioner, and Mr. Hcrdmau (instructed by Messrs. Mooro and Bealo) to withdraw a defenco filed by respondent on the ground that it could not be substantiated. Petitioner deposed that on 7th May, 1897, he was married at St. Kilda, Victoria, to respondent. It was now about 17 years ago since ho caine out to Victoria from Mount Lebanon. Ho had not been naturalised in any British colony. After the marriage ho and his wife went to live in South Australia, and subsequently in Queensland. Petitioner came over to New Zealand in 1899, and after repeated requests respondent joined him at Palmerston North in 1902.' Some months later .-. respondent, against his wishes, wont over to Sydney. Petitioner was proceeded against in September, 1903, for failing to, maintain respondent, and an order was made. Afrthat time he was unaware that respondent had returned to the Dominion. He had been sued for having disobeyed the order. Repeatedly he had asked respondent to return to him. He had not done very well in New. Zealand, but did not intend to return to his native land. There were no children of the marriage. Ainin Bailout, brother of petitioner, also, gave evidence. His Honour; jipkl. that ~tlie. petitioner was entitled'to a "divorce. Ho' had proved the allegations in his petition that he was deserted by his wife, and that the desertion had continued for more than five years. Nothing was disclosed which would disentitle petitioner to the relief which he claimed. In cases whero ono or both the parties ■ wef-o foreigners the question of domicile was an important one. Petitioner had proved that he was domiciled in New Zealand. The fact that he had married a British subject in British _ dominions was of itself some evidence of his intention to settle hero. Further, petitioner had stated that ho did not desire to return to his native land. A decree nisi was granted, to be made absolute after three months. Ii\ T BANCO. LIABILITY FOll DRAINAGE. CITY COUNCIL v. JUDGE HASELDEN.' JUDGMENT RESERVED. Sitting in Banco yesterday Mr. Justice Cooper heard argument with respect to the case of the City Corporation (appellants) t. W. R. Haselden (respondent). ; Mr. J. O'Shea appeared on behalf of the appellants, and Mr. H. D. Bell, IC.C. (with him Mr. Von Ilaast), for the respondent. The facts in this caso were as follow:— In 1892 an Act was passed enabling the city to borrow money for the purpose of carrying out a new drainage scheme, the regulations in connection with which required that overy house had to bo supplied with two separate drains. The Drainage Empowering Act, 1894, provided that the council should not charge any owner with the cost of constructing and laying any drain in place of any drain which in or subsequently to the month of July, 1890, was laid in accordance with the by-laws of the city for the time- being in force. In 1890 a house was built in Molesworth Street by a Mr. Johnson, and was completed on July 12 of that year. Tile house was purchased from Mr. Johnson in September, 1890, by Judge Haselden'. Before making tho purchase Judge Has.elden made inquiries from the City Council," and was informed that tho drainage system of the house complied with tho by-laws. No demands were made upon Judge Haselden in regard to this matter until November 1903j when tho council served upon him a notice which required him to lay a fourinch drain, and also do other drainage w 7 Ork which was specified. Judge Haselden did not comply with this demand, and the council caused tho work to bo carried out at a cost of £25 os. 6d., and sued Judge Haselden for this amount and interest, etc. Dr. M'Arthur, S.M., hold that the council, having once approved of the drainage, could not turn round afterwards and say tho drains were not satisfactory, and call upon defendant to make new drains. He, therefore, gave judgment for Judge Haselden. From this decision the council now appealed. Mr. O'Shea asked his Honour to remit the caso back to tho magistrate in order that the time when.the drain was completed might be definitely settled. His Honour held that the case must bo argued upon tho facts as found by tho magistrate. ' Mr. O'Shea submitted that the notice could bo given under cither Act; that the magistrate's statement of the caso by inference showed that Judge Haselden did not come within the exemption provided by the statute, and that the statement in the case that lie did come within tho Act was a statement of law and not of fact. ' - After hoariiig argument at length his Honour intimated that' ho would take timo tr consider his judgment. CLAIM FOR GOODS SUPPLIED. WYETT v. SMITH AND SMITH, LTD. An interesting point was involved in the case of C. E. Wyett, dentist (appellant) v. Smith and Smith, Ltd., oil and colour merchants (respondents), which was hoard by Mr. Justice Cooper in Banco yesterday. , Mr. Young appeared on behalf of the appellant and Mr. Findlay for the respondents. The facts wore as follow:—Appellant gave an order to respondents to do some paperhanging at his house. After the paper had been sent to the house and before the work of putting it on had been completed the

house was destroyed by fire. Respondents brought a claim against appellant. Mr. Kiddeli, S.M., who heard the ease, hold that the contract to supply : tlie paper and the contract to supply the labour were separato contracts. It was decided by him that tho cost of the paper should fa.ll'on Mr. Wyett, and the cost of the labour on Smith and Smith. From this decision the appeal was brought. Mr. \oung submitted that the contract was an entire contract, and that tho money was not to bo paid before tho completion of the contract. His Honour, during the argument, observed that it appeared to him that tho most equitable solution of the difficulty would bo for each party to bear, half tho cost. Mr. Findlay contended that in order for appellant to succeed ho would have to show that tho contract was an entire one; that the money was irrecoverable before completion of the work, and that the contract was for a specific sum Judgment was reserved. IN CHAMBERS. QUESTION OF COSTS. A question of costs-in connection with the recent litigation between Miss Meinertzhagen and Mrs. Donnelly and others was considered by Mr. Justice Edwards in Chambers yesterday. Mr. Bell, K.C., on behalf of Mrs. Donnelly and others, moved for an order certifying for costs of extra counsel and for sccond upon the hearing of the motion, for an injunction and counter motion for tho discharge of that injunction. Sir. Morison appeared on behalf of Miss Meinertzhagen. Judgment was reserved. MOTION FOR ADJUDICATION. An application to adjudicate James Joseph Cronin, indent agent, etc., of Wellington, a bankrupt, came 011 for hearing before Mr. Justico Cooper yesterday. Mr. Coolie appeared on behalf of the debtor to oppose the application. There- was no appearance of counsel for the petitioning creditor. The hearing of the summons wa,s adjourned until Tuesday next at 10 a.m., the petitioning creditor to pay two guineas costs of the adjournment.