Brown v Walters [1931] HCA 45

1931. —) Sypney,

Nov. 17; Dee. 3.

Gavan Duffy C.J., Starke, Dixon, Evatt and McTiernan JI.

HIGH COURT

[HIGH COURT

BROWN . INTERVENER,

WALTERS RESPONDENT,

In rE WALTERS v. WALTERS.

ON APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND.

before the Court—Leave to intervene—Application by father of res After period limited in decree nisi—Period within which application made—Competency of applicant and application—Adultery " during

7*—Rules of the Supreme Court (Q.), Order XII.,rr. 18-20*; Order X

pena

Held, (1) that the expression " by reason of material facts not having |

brought before the Court" in sec.

includes facts, not otherwise brought to the Court's knowledge, which

occurred after decree nisi, and are decree absolute (Hulse v. Hulse, (1

Howarth, (1884) 9 P.D, 218, referred to) ;

* The Matrimonial Causes Act 1875 (Q.) provides, by sec. 7, that " Every decree for a divorce shall in the first instance be a decree nisi not to be made absolute till after the expiration of such time not being less than three months from the pronouncing thereof as the Court shall by general or special order from time to time direct and during that

OF AUSTRALIA.1

. APPLICANT AND APPE:

AND

by petitioner after decree nisi alleged—Material facts not having been bro

7 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1875

material to be known upon the motion 871) L.R. 2 P. & D, 259, and Howarth

riod any person shall be at lib Sah ced as the Court shall b general or special order in that from time to time direct to show why such decree should not absolute by reason of the same been obtained by collusion or by of material facts not hay brought before the Court.

LR.)

164 E.R. 1381, followed) ;

(1883) 8 P.D, 188, followed).

onder of Henchman J. restored.

e Court of Queensland.

so shown the Court shall 'case by making the decree or by reversing the decree nisi juiring further inquiry or other-