INTERESTING DECISION

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume LXXXII, Issue 19478, 26 December 1925, Page 10

INTERESTING DECISION

PROCEEDINGS FOR DIVORCE WIFE IN ENGLAND An interesting decision regarding the course to be adopted for the serving ol a notice for divorce proceedings when one of the parties is in another r country has been delivered by Mr Jus- I tice Reed in an Auckland case in which Edward Liversey (Mr J. F. W. Dickson) moved a motion for direction as to how to serve Leah Liversey, his wife, who is domiciled in England. His Honour’s decision is: ‘‘This order for service in England of the petition and citation of the respondent, Leah Liversey, has been made by a 1 judge of the Supreme Court of New Zealand upon certain conditions. ‘‘l. The petitioner alleges that he is now domiciled in New Zealand—that is to say, that he has become a permanent resident of this Dominion. ‘‘2. In that case he is cntitle<l to sue in the Supremo Court of the Dominion for a divorce based on any ground specified in the statute laws of tin* Dominion. No other court has jurisdiction to entertain a petition or grant him a divorce. The law of New Zealand is different from that of England in that if a husband and wife by mutual consent agree to separate and such agreement is in full force, and has so continued for not less than three years, either party may in New Zealand sue for a divorce. If the petitioner obtains a divorce it will have the effect of annulling any order at present existing for the maintenance of the respondent, unless in the divorce proceedings an order for alimony or maintenance is made. The respondent has a right to appear and defend the suit if she has a defence. It is a deefnee (1) that there was no mutual agreement as to separation, but that the petitioner deserted the respondent; (2) that if there was either an express or implied mutual agreement to separate, that the separation was due to the wrongful act or conduct of the petitioner. Lest her absence from the Dominion may impose a hardship on the respondent His Honour the Judge directs the petitioner to forward to his wife the sum of £5 in order that she may take advice in England in case she should desire to defend the suit. If she desires to defend the suit or to apply for maintenance, she should either directly or through a solicitor in England send authority to a solicitor in New Zealand instructing him to act for her. The petitioner, by accepting this order, undertakes to repay the respondent’s solicitor the cost of filing an answer to the petition, or filing a petition for alimony, and of attending before a Judge in Chambers upon an application as to the respondent’s future costs and as to the expenses to which she may be put in preceding to New Zealand and to conduct her defence should she decide to go there. ”