Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

UNUSUAL CASE

A SECOND MARRIAGE

FIRST PARTNERS MISSING

DISCLOSURE IN COURT ACTION

The unusual circumstances of a marriaeo were disclosed during the hearing of a compensation claim brought before Mr. Justice o'Regan in tho Compensation Court yesterday. r ihe plaintiff was Gwendoline Maud Groom (Mr. Sullivan), whose husband, 1' rank Robert Groom, was killed in an accident on Kinu's Wharf on November 26 last. She brought action under the Workers Compensation Act against Richardson and Company, Limited, shipowners (Mr. J. B. Flliot), by whom her husband was employed, claiming a lump sum in compensation, funeral expenses of £25 and costs.

Tho plaintiff gave evidence that when she married Groom in Auckland in April, in.'iU, she had not seen or heard of her first husband for 21 years, and Groom had not seen or heard of his first wife for I!) years. She had been totally dependent on Groom. She had married her first, husband in London in J9J;}, and since he ordered her to leave in BUR she had made many inquiries, but. had been unable to hear anything of him. She understood there were two sons of Groom's first marriage, aged 30 and 2H. Mr. Klliot saiil it was not intended to defend the action, but owing to the curious circumstances of the marriage it was thought desirable that formal evidence should he given. His Honor said the production of the marriage certificate was enough for him. Mr. Klliot said it was a marriage capable of being invalidated by either the plaintiff's husband or the deceased's wife reappearing. He asked that judgment be recorded as on behalf of all defendants. Mr. Sullivan contended it would be un.just> to make any such addition to the order. His Honor said the liability was admitted to be £IOOO, but he would give a considered judgment on points raised.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZH19410619.2.120

Bibliographic details

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 23995, 19 June 1941, Page 12

Word Count
306

UNUSUAL CASE New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 23995, 19 June 1941, Page 12

UNUSUAL CASE New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 23995, 19 June 1941, Page 12

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert