DIVORCE BY MUTUAL CONSENT

Evening Star, Issue 17597, 28 February 1921, Page 8

DIVORCE BY MUTUAL CONSENT

A JUDGE’S COMMENT,

Thu fact that a divorce petition need only prove that by mutual consent husband and wife have parted, and have been apart for three years, to provide sufficient ground in the discretion of the court for divorce, was the subject of a comment by Mr Justice Stringer at the Auckland Supreme Court on Saturday. Mr Dickson drew His Honor’s attention to two oases about to bo heard, in which separation by mutual consent was the ground of the petition, and he said that as the proceedings were under the Amending Act of 1920, and as there was likely to be a considerable number of such cases, members of the Bar would bo glad to have a ruling as to what evidence would bo considered necessary. His Honor said that he proposed following the course adopted by Mr Justice Sim, who was an authority upon the divorce j aw —namely, to grant decrees nisi, but to provide that a decree absolute must bo proved so that any party who desired to oppose it would have ah opportunity cf so doing. “ This Divorce Act Amendment,” said His Honor at a later stage, " certainly seems to have made the obtaining of a divorce an extremely simple matter now. Apparently all that people havo to do is to agree to live separate and apart for three years, and then apparently they can got divorced.” r Mr Singer: There is discretion, it seems to me. . . His Honor : Yes, there is discretion, i suppose. Moralists will disagree as to whether or not this is legislation which is in the interests of the community, but judges have only to administer the law as they find it.