DIVORCE PETITION.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19904, 25 September 1926, Page 11

DIVORCE PETITION.

AN UNUSUAL CASE. QUESTION OF DOMICILE. (Per United Press Association.) HAMILTON, September 24. An unusual divorce case was heard before Mr Justice Stringer at the Hamilton Supreme Court to-day, when Edith Rachel Lerve, of Hamilton, petitioned for a dissolution of her marriage with Jules Marie Lerve, a Frenchman by birth. According to international law two priciples are involved where a women residing in New Zealand petitions for a divorce against a husband living in a foreign country. The first is that the domicile for the time being affords the only true tost of jurisdiction to dissolve the marriage. The second is that a married woman’s domicile is that of her husband, and changes with his, even though living apart, but a section of the New Zealand Divorce Ant states that a wife domiciled in New Zealand at the time of desertion is deemed to have retained her New Zealand domicile even though the husband acquired a foreign one. The parties wore married at Rawene in 1913, the wife being New Zealand born. The husband served in France in the N.Z.E.F., and, after the Armistice, lie sent his wife to visit his relatives in Paris, where she stayed for over a year, the husband then sent her bach to New Zealand, and promised to follow her later, but failed to do so. Twelve months ago a judge decided to permit a substituted service by the French police on tespondent’s mother or sister, as he could not be found. After proceedings extending over two years, in which letters passed between the British and French Foreign offices, the French police announced that hey had failed to find respondent or the uother or sister. Mr Justice Stringer to-day said ne was onvinced that respondent had acquired a New Zealand domicile of his choice, which lie still retained at the time of r.is desertion. A decree nisi was granted.