COURT OF APPEAL

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXX, 18 June 1936, Page 11

COURT OF APPEAL

MAINTENANCE IN DIVORCE CASE IMPORTANT POINT RAISED (By Telegraph—Press Association) WELLINGTON, This Day. The Court of Appeal to-day commenced the hearing of the case Alexander Pooley versus Violetta Irene Pooley. In September 1931, Violetta Irene Pooley, of Auckland, obtained a divorce from her husband, Alexander Pooley, and the custody of their child. About that time the husband agreed to pay his wife £2 a week towards the maintenance and support of herself and child. This amount was regularly paid until some time in 1934, when it was reduced to £1 10s a week. A further reduction was made to £1 a week in January last, when the present respondent took proceedings for permanent maintenance. On 12th March last, Mr Justice sFair held that respondent was entitled to maintenance, which he fixed at £1 10s a week. Appellant’s husband then obtained leave to appeal in forma pauperis from this judgment. Mr James, for appellant, stated that a question of general importance was involved. How long after a decree absolute has the court power to make an order for permanent maintenance? In his submission the learned trial Judge had drawn certain wrong inferences of fact and had acted erroneously in law in awarding permanent maintenance to respondent some four years after a decree absolute had been made.

On the bench were Ihe Acting Chief Justice, Mr Reed, and Mr Justices Smith, Johnson and Nortncroft.