SUPREME COURT

Evening Star, Issue 20255, 16 August 1929, Page 8

SUPREME COURT

DAMAGES APPORTIONED CO-RESPONDENT SPEARS'S £SBO DIVORCE GASES BEFORE COURT The question of the apportionmenl! of £SOO damages awarded against the co-respondent in a recent divorce case came before His Honor Mr Justice Ken-, nedy in the Supreme Court this morning. The petitioner was William Matthew, Brosnan, and the respondent Isabella Agnes Brosnan. The co-respondent was George William Spears. Mr H. E. Barrowclough, for the petitioner, appeared in support of the motion. Mr A. C. Hanlon appeared for the respondent, and Mr W. G. Hay appeared for the co-respondent, who, ne said, was not interested in the matter before the court. . : Mr Barrowclough said that counsel for the respondent and ho had been able to reach a tentative agreement as to the apportionment of the damages, subject to the approval of the court. The proposed arrangement was that £2OO of the £SOO damages should be paid to the Public Trustee in trust for the two children of the marriage, the Public Trustee to apply either the capital or the income, or both, for the benefit of the children; and that the remaining £3OO be paid to the petitioner.

His Honour said he was prepared to make an order if the parties agreed. Mr Hanlon said he had gone into the matter very carefully on behalf of the children. Having gone into the question of the expenses incurred by the petitioner, the respondent agreed with counsel that it would he fair if £2OO was set aside for the children. His Honour asked if counsel had rim out the details of tho order. Mr Barrowclongh suggested that Mr Hanlon and he draw out the details of the order and submit them to Hie Honour in Chambers for approval. His H oncmr made an or<^er in terms of the settlement agreed upon, the details to be settled .in Chambers. In replv to His Honour Mr Hanlon said lie did not wish to mention tho question of the wife’s costs, the corespondent having agreed to pay them without any order being made.

ALIMONY AGREED UPON Ada Dehenham (petitioner) v. Arthur Debenham (respondent).—Mr A. G. Hanlon, for the respondent, applied for permanent maintenance. Counsel said he had received a letter from the solicitors for respondent stating that respondent consented to pay alimony at the rate of £2 10s a week.—His Honour 1 made an order 1 that respondent pay petitioner £2 10s a week during their joint lives.—Costs of £3 _3s and disbursements were allowed against respondent. DEGREES MADE ABSOLUTE Decrees nisi were made absolute In the following cases:— William J. B. Downes (petitioner) vMyra Florence Downes (respondent)Mr A. C. Hanlon appeared in support of the motion. Emma Maria Elizabeth Mooney (petitioner) v. John Mooney (respondent) - Mr C. J. L. White appeared in support of the motion. Petitioner was granted custody of the children of tho marriage. Daisy Evelyn Robertson (petitioner)' v. James Robertson (respondent). Mr White appeared in support of the motion. ■Victoria Resina Dryden (petitioner)] v. William Smith Dryden (respondent). Mr White appeared for the petitioner, and'Mr Hanlon for tho respondent. Margaret Merritt (petitioner) vJanies Merritt (respondent). _ Mr B. S. Irwin appeared for the petitioner, who was granted oustedv of the child. Minga Elizabeth Eliza Rae (petitioner) v. Robert Riacb Rae (respondent). Mr B. fi. Irwin appeared for the petitioner, who was granted custody of the children. Jane Coulter (petitioner) v. William Coulter ( respondent). Mr R L. Pairmaid appeared for the petitioner. _ William Frederick Carmichael (petitioner) v. Elizabeth Carmichael (respondent). Mr 11. E. Barrowclongh appeared in support.