DIVORCE TO STAND

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LV, Issue 17606, 23 October 1931, Page 9

DIVORCE TO STAND

APPEAL COURT DECISION PERJURY ALLEGATIONS (For Press Association.) WELLINGTON, this day. The judgment of the Court of Appeal, prepared by Mr. Justice Smith, was delivered by Mr. Justice Reed in the case of Austin .v. Austin this morning. The court, in its judgment, holds that there was not sufficient evidence brought before it to establish that perjury was committed at the trial, nor was it of the opinion that the verdict of the jury was against the weight of evidence, and accordingly the appeal was allowed and an order made setting aside the order of Mr. Justice Adams allowing a new trial. The court also expressed its opinion that the correct way for a co-respondent to attack the judgment on the grounds of perjury was by an independent 'action alleging perjury. Accordingly the appeal was allowed subject to an undertaking being filed by the appellant that lie will not apply to have the decree nisi made absolute for two months, or in the event of action being taken. The appeal was from the judgment of Mr. Justice Adams in granting a new trial in the divorce case Harold Neaves Austin, of New Plymouth, against Violet Eliza Austin and William James Newell, also of New Plymouth, it being stated that two witnesses at the original hearing had since been convicted of perjury,