PETITION FOR JUDICIAL SEPARATION.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLIII, Issue 13170, 7 May 1906, Page 5

PETITION FOR JUDICIAL SEPARATION.

■.{: <» •; ' • ' ■■ ■ INTERESTING LEGAL POINT. [BY TELEGRAPH. —PRESS ASSOCIATION'.] Wellington, Saturday. The Chief Justice gave judgment to-day in the case of Hoy versus Hoy, petition for judicial separation. On a motion to dismiss the petition, the co-respondent raised the question that the Court had no jurisdiction to entertaiin the suit, on the ground that neither party was resident or domiciled! in New. Zealand at the time the proceedings commenced. The petitioner was cook on the British ship Sardhaiiai, which, at the time of the institution of the

suit, and for some time previously, had been lying alongside one of the jetties in Wellington Harbour. Respondent is his wife, and the co-respondent is captain of the vessel. Respondent was stewardess On the ship. Petitioner amd respondent, said His Honor in giving judgment, were both on board the ship at the time at which itwas alleged that adultery took place, and the captain also was on boau'd the vessel. Petitioner and respondent- were married in America, and afterwards lived in Vancouver, and in Ladysmitb, in the province of British Columbia, in the Dominion of Canada. They joined the ship at the port of Chemainus, • British Columbia. They shipped as belonging to British Columbia, Bind of British nationality. It was clear, therefore, that the domicile of petitioner was not that of New Zealand, and th« question was whether, seeing that the suit was not for divorce, but for judicial separation only and damages from co-respondent, there was jurisdiction in the Court to hear it. If the suit had been for divorce it wasabundantly plain that there would have been no jurisdiction in the Court to entertain it. In this case the alleged matrimonial offence was committed in Wellington. It was true that the parties were not domiciled in New Zealand. Petitioner and his. wife, were, however, having been paid off the ship, resident in New Zeailand, and, as petitioner only sought separation, His Honor ruled that the Court had power to entertain the suit. The motion to dismiss the petition would be dismissed, with £5 5s costs. . _