RIGHT TO DIVORCE

Evening Star, Issue 17959, 4 May 1922, Page 10

RIGHT TO DIVORCE

ABORTIVE APPEAL AGAINST NEW LAW. The Court, of Appeal heard argument at Wellington yesterday afternoon in the case of Lodder v. Lodder, an appeal against tho judgment of Mr Justice Salmond in October last, whereby a decree nisi for lire dissolution of tho marriage of tho parties was made. The husband, William George Lodder, petitioned for a divorce on the ground that the parties had been separated under a deed of separation since .September 19, 1908. Mr Justice Salmond, in the exercise of the discretionary power conferred on him by the 'Divorce and .Matrimonial Causes Act Amendment Act, 1920, granted a decree nisi. Mr E. G. Jellicoe appeared for Airs Lodder, tho appellant, and Mr A. W. Blair for the respondent. When Mr Jellicoe opened his argument Mr Justice Eim intimated that unless counsel could distinguish this case from the appeal case of Mason v. Mason it was useless for him to proceed. Mr Joliicoo said he could not distinguish the case on the facts, but he contended that Mr Justice Salmond had exercised his discretion in granting divorce on a wrong principle. The Court again informed Mr Jellicoe that unless he could distinguish tho present case from the case of Macon v. Mason ho was merely wasting the time of tho court. Mr Jellicoe thereupon concluded his argument. Mr Blair was not called upon io argue, and the court delivered its decision orally. Mr Justice Sim said that mcording to the decision in Mason v. Mason tho petitioner had a, prima tame right to a dissolution of marriage, and unless Mrs Lodder could show some reason for the court not granting it the divorce decree was properly marie. Nothing had been brought, forward in evidence to warrant the. court in refusing to exercise ils discretion in petitioner's favor. In his opinion the appeal should be- dismissed. Mr Justice Husking and Mi- Justice Stringer coiieurred. and the appeal was Ihoietoro dismissed. \vi(limit, costs.