Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
This article displays in one automatically-generated column. View the full page to see article in its original form.

HUSBAND AND WIFE

Air Justice Hood, at Alelbourne, recently dealt with a curious point under the Imprisonment of 1* raudutent Debtors Act. A woman obtained from justices an order against her husband for payment of money, She afterwards secured from the justices an older under tho Imprisonment ot rraudulont Debtors Act for payment of the amount by instalments, with an order for imprisonment in default ot payment. Tho husband appealed to tho Court of General Sessions, which confirmed the order. It was stated in the General Sessions that the judgment creditor was the wife of tho judgment debtor, but no objection was taken to the power of the Court to confirm the order. The husband now asked the Supremo Court for an order to prohibit the chairman of General Sessions from giving effect to his order, ou the ground that in law a wife is not competent to obtain nn order of this kind against her husband. Argument m support of this proposition was advanced, but, unfortunately, from the legal point of view, the point was not decided, but was left severely alone. Air Justice Hood refused tho prohibition for several reasons. One was that an order under the Imprisonment of Fraudulent Debtors Act is merely a mode of execution —a means of getting satisfaction of tho original order for payment. Hence tho Supremo Court could not interfere with tho process of execution so long as the original order stood. Then His Honor held that prohibition will not he granted where any other remedy exists. It is a discretionary remedy, designed to prevent injustice, which must otherwise necessarily occur. Now, the husband might in tho General Sessions have insisted on tho objection, and have secured a ruling on the main point by means of a case stated. He did not do this, and so lost his chance. His Honor further said that tho rule nisi was wrong in form, because it was directed to the chairman of tho Court, and not to the Court, itself. Thus the husband, whether he was right in his main contention or not, could not have his position cleared > up in the Supremo Court on a prohibition application.

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/ESD19141128.2.11

Bibliographic details

HUSBAND AND WIFE, Evening Star, Issue 15662, 28 November 1914

Word Count
363

HUSBAND AND WIFE Evening Star, Issue 15662, 28 November 1914

Working