DIVORCE LAWS

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXV, Issue 23033, 10 May 1938, Page 8

DIVORCE LAWS

AUSTRALIAN PKOBLEJI QUESTION OF DOMICILE • - • PROPOSED UNIFORMITY [FROM OUR OWN CORRESPONDENT] SYDXEY, April 30 A committee of eminent Australian counsel, to whom the Commonwealth Government referred constitutional problems in the way of creating a uni. form divorce domicile in Australia, has evolved a practical formula, which is shortly to be considered by the Federal Cabinet. The proposal is to invest State Court* with Federal jurisdiction on the sole point of domicile, so that, for the pur- - pose of domicile, every State Court will be in effect a Federal Court. This can be done by virtue of Section 51 of the Constitution, which includes divorce and matrimonial caused among the powers conferred by th<» Commonwealth Parliament. The over-riding powers of the Commonwealth law will avoid the necessity for any amendment of the State Act to give effect to the committee's recommendation. Most Difficulties Covered This solution will not cover the case of people migrating to Australia who, by reason of failure to settle in any particular State, have not acquired a domicile in any State, and divorces granted under the suggested formula which may not be recognised in foreign countries.

These two classes of cases are comparatively i«ire, and the committee con. siders that its recommendation will cover more than 90 per cent of domicile difficulties in Australian divorce cases. The advantage of the proposed solution is that it will provide an Australian domicile without disturbing existing State laws as to grounds of divorce, and - will give a person domiciled in any Australian State the right to petition in that State which was the last matrimonial home of tho party. Attitude of the Commonwealth The Commonwealth, by virtue of its powers under Section 51 of the Constitution, and of |.ts power to over-ridg State laws on matters over which it has constitutional control, could so1v«l the problem by a comprehensive divorce bill, exercising these powers in full, a This would mean that the Commonwealth would become responsible ftr all the administration of divorce law in Australia and would have to set up its own divorce Courts. Naturally, it does not desire to take this course, biit desires the States to continue to administer divorce.