NULLITY SUIT

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXVI, Issue 20032, 2 September 1939, Page 13

NULLITY SUIT

WIFE UNDER 16 YEARS HUSBAND’S PETITION FIRST CASE IN N.Z. DECREE NISI GRANTED (Per Press Association.) AUCKLAND, this day. The first case of its kind under New Zealand law and cne apparently without precedent also in English law was brought in the .Supreme Court when a husband sought the nullity of his marriage on the ground that the girl with whom he went through a form of marriage was under the age of 16 at the time. • Tlie section of the Marriage Amendment Act, 1933, under. which the petition was 'brought, reads: “Marriage between persons, either of whom is under the age of 16 years, shall toe void." “I am sorry to see that the law is altered in that way,” said Mr. Justice Ostler, who presided, “but that is what it means, and it seems there cannot be any question about it” The petitioner was Norman Geoffrey Guide (Mr. Hodgson), who asked for annulment of his marriage with Pearl Vowles.

Mr. Hodgson said that Guide, who was a jeweller now living in Greymouth, went through a form of marrage with the respondent on April 24, 1938, in a church at Te Puke. Her age was then given as 16, and they lived together until April, 1937, when, they’separated. The petitioner said he had endea-

voured to get his wife back, but she would not come. They had no children and, in November last, she obtained a maintenance and separation order against him. On making inquiries, he learned that she was born at Howera on December 9, 1920, and was therefore 15 years and nearly five months old at the time of the marriage ceremony. He had no idea that she was under 16. Mr. Hodgson said that the Marriage Amendment Act, 1933, on which he relied, followed the English Act of 1929. iHis Honour said the strong word

“void” was used and he would like to know how the thing was done in England,

Mr. Hodgson said he had been unable to find any English decisions on the point involved since the coming into force of the Marriage Act, 1929. The petitioner had put in -an appeal against the maintenance order, tout this was not proceeded with when he learned the respondent’s age.

; “I suppose ‘void’ means ‘void,’ but it is a very strange thing that the law should toe altered like that,” said His Honour. He added that he had known of a number of cases in which a man had been charged with carnal knowledge of a girl under the age of 16, and the court had often thought the best solution, was for them to marry This law meant that such marriages would not be legal.

Mr. Hodgson said that marriage would not be n refuge in such cases unless the man was not prosecuted until after the girl had attained the age of 16. In this case the girl’s mother knew quite well what her age was.

His Honour said he could make a decree absolute or a decree nisi. He preferred in this case to make a decree nisi, to toe moved absolute at the end of three months, and he would instruct the registrar to communicate the facts to the Solicitor-General. If the Crown thought there was anything to be said against this view of the law, it would have the .opportunity of saying it.