Dearman v Dearman [1916] HCA 24

264. HIGH COURT [1916.

H.C. or A. by inserting the word " having"? before the oes, words "the internal edge." Respondent to BroapBenr pay costs of appeal and £10 10s. for costs Pens before Commissioner. Solicitor for the appellants, Arthur Muddle. Solicitor for the respondent, Henry Davis. B. L. [HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA.} MELBOURNE NATHAN DEARMAN 5 . APPELLANT ; AND DAISY GERTRUDE DEARMAN 5 é . ReEsponpeENT. DAISY GERTRUDE DEARMAN 2 f . APPELLANT; AND MELBOURNE NATHAN DEARMAN : . REsPoNDENT. ON APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES. H.C. oF A.

1915-1916, Husband and Wife—Divorce—Desertion—Constructive desertion—Bvidence.

Where a husband leaves his wife in consequence of conduct on her part

Non 21, 35, Whish justifies him in believing that she has committed adultery, her conduct 1918; does not amount to constructive desertion by her unless it is marked by April 10, persistence regardless of consequences or is accompanied by refusal to dis- 1916. continue that conduct, so as to show an intention on her part to break off sy matrimonial relations or an intention to persevere in intolerable conduct. Gavan Duffy

and Rich JJ. Decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales (Gordon J.) affirmed.

21 C.L.R.} OF AUSTRALIA.

Appeats from the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

Suits for dissolution of marriage on the ground of desertion for three years and upwards were brought by Melbourne Nathan Dear- man against his wife Daisy Gertrude Dearman and by her against her husband, and the two suits were consolidated. The consoli- dated suit, in which the husband was made the petitioner, was heard by Gordon J., who dismissed both petitions.

From that decision each party appealed to the High Court.

The material facts are stated in the judgment hereunder.

Melbourne Nathan Dearman, in person.