UNUSUAL LAW SUIT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LIX, Issue 18275, 16 December 1922, Page 7

UNUSUAL LAW SUIT.

SEPARATION AGREEMENT.

OBJECTION BY THE WIFE.

ORDER FOR FULFILMENT.

An unusual application for an order for specific performance of an agreement was heard before Mr. Justice Stringer at the Supreme Court yesterday. The applicant, Raymond Gilbert White (Mr. Anderson), of Whitford, farmer, sought an order enforcing specific performance of an agreement for mutual separation from his wife, Darcie Grant White (Mr. Ostler J.

Counsel for the applicant explained that the agreement in question was made aa a compromise in an action for judicial separation by the husband. The case came on for hearing in February, when Mr. Endean appeared for the petitioner and M!r, Johnstone for the respondent. A conference was held between the parties, with the result that an agreement" wa3 drawn up and signed by counsel on behalf of their respective clients. Subsequently the respondent said that she did not fully realise the meaning of the agreement and repudiated it.

Evidence was given by W. P. Endean regarding the making of the agreement. He said the terms were fully explained. Mr. Ostler, for respondent, said there wa.s no legal ground on whi';h be could resist the present application. The matter was for the discretion of the Court. In the circumstances he suggested that the Court would be justified in refusing the application.

The respondent, giving evidence, exhibited considerable emotion. She said 'she had been married for 20 years and had been happy until her husband returned from the war. Differences had then arisen, but she had done her best to heal the breach. When the agreement was made she did not understand l that it was for mutual separation. Cross-examined, the respondent admitted "that when Mr. Endean went to see her she locked herself in h»r room, arf she did not wish to be questioned. She did not know that three doctors had advised her husband that it was ag'.inst the in- j terests of his health to continue living with her. The witness admitted that she told Mr. Johnstone to do anything he could to keep the case out of Court, bnt she did not realise that she was agreeing to a mutual separation. Questioned by His Honor, the witness said she did not want to be mutually separated. She did not realise what Mr. Johnstone was reading when the agreement was made. Asked if the complaints < made by her husband in the suit for judicial separation were true, the witness said she was very much upset sometimes and said things she did not mean. At such times her husband said : " Old girl, I know you did not mean anything." The witness added that, notwithstanding the charges made by her husband, she did not see why they should not again live happily together. She was much too fond of her husband to be cruel to him. Mr. A. H. Johnstone, who had acted for Mrs. White in the proceedings for judicial separation, stated that when he signed the agreement he understood that ho had Mrs. White's authority to do so. The parties were In a good station in life. There were two eons —one 11 and one 19. The petitioner had informed witness that he had taken his wife to specialists in London;. They were of opinion that she was somewhat abnormal. In reply to His Honor, witness said he could see no useful purpose in not completing the agreement. It was the type of case -where serious charges were made by both parties, and apparently there was no chance of them coming together. Had he thought Mrs. White did hot understand the arrangement, ho would not have signed it. ' Delivering judgment, His Honor saiaho was asked to exercise his discretion on ground that Mrs. White did not? fully appreciate the effect of the settlement. He did not think that was a good grounu'. The respondent was fortunate in having the advice of counsel of the high reputation of Mr. Johnstone than whom none could be better qualified to advise her. His Honor added that he agreed absolutely with the advice resnondent's counsel Had given Her. He considered the parties were conserving "their own interests in arriving at a settlement in the manner they did. There seemed no prospect of a more satisfactory result being arrived at. The wife was fully protected under the agreement, and ho would grant specifio performance.