NEW DIVORCE ACT

Otago Witness, Issue 3495, 8 March 1921, Page 53

NEW DIVORCE ACT

PETITIONS UNDER CLAUSE 4. INVERCARGILL, March 2. A petition lor divorce under clause 4 of “The Di vorce and Matrimonial Causes Amendment Act 1920,” was before Mr Justice Sim at the Supreme Court to-day in the case of Sommerviiie v. Sommerviiie, a husband s petition, which was not opposed, except that respondent asked for pendente lite. Counsel for petitioner (Mr W, A. Stout) said that the case had been before Ins Honor previously, the ground of the petition then being desertion. The petition hail been dismissed-, his Honor holding that desertion had been practically by the mutual consent of the parties. Since then a new Act had come into force providing for divorce on the ground of mutual consent. His Honor. Dees it? Mr Stout: I submit that. His Honor said there was no affidavit by petitioner. The petition was hinged on the ground of mutual consent, and unless the petitioner could swear to that the case could not proceed. Mr Stout said the petitioner had previously sworn that to the best of his recollection the separation was not by' mutual consent. The judge said that probably the Full Court would have to consider the matter. If the section was read literally it was obvi ous that the words in question had been thrust into it without much thought. The Full Court would have to decide whether the words three years applied to a separation order, although not under a deed, or whether the words were meaningless, and could not be given effect to. He understood that the words were not in the Bill drafted by the Hon. J. MacGregor, but were inserted by the Lower House on the motion of a gentleman who had had a good deal to do with divorce, lie hoped to have an opportunity of discussing the position with other judges at the Court of Appeal in April. His Honor ordered that a petition setting out the facts under section 4 bo filed, together with a verifying affidavit, when decision would bo reserved. An order for alimony was made.