DIYOECE CASE APPEAL

Evening Post, Volume CXVI, Issue 95, 19 October 1933, Page 7

DIYOECE CASE APPEAL

TO BE RE-ARGUED

In the Court of Appeal yesterday the Chief Justice (Sir Michael Myers) mentioned the case Charles Albert Ormond John Keast, electrician, of Tiniaru (appellant) and Ella Louise Keast, of Christchurch (respondent). In this case tho substantial question raised! was whether a parting between

a husband and his wife about three months prior to the making of a magisterial order for separation in the'wife's favour constituted a separation upon which the husband could prosecute with success ii petition for divorce. Mr. ! Justice Blair had held that there was no separation between the husband and wife prior to the Cour order, and dis- [ missed the husband's petition for divorce. This decision was appealed > against. Tho Chief Justice said the ground-on which the Appeal Court was asked to i deal was the question involved upon

the authority of a decision of the Court of Appeal in England. The question had arisen as to whether that case really applied to New Zealand by reason of differences in the divorce law. The question involved the status of parties in matters of marriage and divorce, and was of public importance. In the English case the papers were, sent to tho King's Proctor. In the present case the Solicitor-General took the place of the King's Proctor, and the papers would, be sent to him and the case re-argued before the two divisions of tho Court at the sittings in March next.