WIFE’S DIVORCE COSTS

Dominion, Volume 20, Issue 56, 30 November 1926, Page 3

WIFE’S DIVORCE COSTS

NO ORDER MADE AGAINST HUSBAND

CASE DESTITUTE OF

MERIT

Dominion Special. Auckland, November 29. A wife who abandons a defence to a divorce action is not entitled to costs against her husband when a decree nisi is granted, if in the opinion of the Judge her case is without merit, ihis point was made clear by Mr. Justice Adams in the Supreme Court m dealing with the divorce petition of John Harold Lynch, bus driver, of Auckland, against Dulcie Joyce Lynch, Herbert Kane, bus driver, of Birkenhead, being cited as co-respondent. Earlier in the session respondent obtained an adjournment of the hearing on the ground, of shortness cf notice, and an intimation was also made on her behalf that the case would be defended and that a jury would be requireo. When the case was called to-day, Mr. Dickson t for respondent and co-respon-dent, intimated that the defence had been withdrawn and that the petition could co ahead as an undefended, case. His client had denied the allegation of adulterv, and he submitted that she was entitled to her costs up to the time of withdrawal of the defence. Petitioner’s counsel (Sir. Northcroft) submitted that this was a case in which the husband should not be ordered to pav the wife’s costs. He contended that respondent had nq defence and never could have had a defence to the action. The case was then heard and a decree nisi, to be made absolute after the expiration of three months, was granted. His Honour said that he proposed to exercise the discretion vested in Judges bv the Divorce and Matrimonial Causes Act, and refuse to make an order for costs aqainst the husband. It was laid down that a wife’s, case must have some special and meritorious aspects before she could obtain costs* acainst her petitioning husband, and in his opinion the present case was one destitute of merit.