EFFECT OF CHILD BENEFIT

Chronicle (Levin), 18 May 1946, Page 5

EFFECT OF CHILD BENEFIT

-Press Associatiop.

MAINTENANCE ORDER REDUCED

By Telegraph—

DUNEDIN, May 17. "Whether the amount of nmintenanco paid by a man in respect'of his child should be reduced by reaspn of the faet that his wife, froni wlioni lie was divoreed, was in r.eceipt of a child Iienofit of 10s a week, was argued in the Uitv Poi ice C'ourt todav by Mr. J. C4. Warrington who opiiosod an applicationby a nian for a variation. of his maintenance order.

The Magistrale, ATr. IT. W. Bundlo, said that he nuist tako into account all the rclevant cireunistances and they ineluded tlie fact that she was reociving 10s a week for the child of tho marriage. Mr. W-arrington said the legislation made it- clear that tlie 10s a week for each child did not absolvc a man from his liabilities for maintaining hischildren and tliat. Court orders for maintcnance should; not be a (Tected. Air. Bundle: Ts not the object of the 10s a week to assist parents to mahitahi their children? Afr. Wai'rington sulimitted that tlve money was given to provide additionaF benelits for the children. A wife who was separated- from her liusband and was maintaining the child, was going to have a liarder time if- maintenarice were reduced, tlian oue living at liome. with her liusband. The Magistrate said tliat all the cireunistances had to be taken into cop.sideration and he intended, in tlie case befofe liim, to reduee tlie amount of niaintenance paid by the liusband. Afr. Warrington: I can onljr accept | wliat tlie Court f e,els about tlie matter,