Redgrave v Redgrave [1951] HCA 21

High Court of Australia Dixon, Williams and Webb JJ. Redgrave v Redgrave [1951] HCA 21

ORDER Appeal allowed with costs. Cross appeal dismissed with costs. Order of Edwards J. varied by striking out the words therein after the word confirmed and substituting therefor the following:—Except that the annual sum be increased to £350, that the annual sum be secured to the petitioner for her life or until remarriage, that the instruments referred to in the Registrar's order for securing the said annual sum shall include the personal covenant of the respondent binding upon him and his executors, that in lieu of the sum of £1,250 cash mentioned in the Registrar's order there be substituted the respondent's policy of assurance on his life, and that in lieu of fixing the sum of £5 10s. 0d. per week it be referred to the Registrar to fix a weekly or other periodical amount to be paid on account of such annual sum. Order that the respondent pay the costs of the proceedings before Edwards J. Liberty to apply to the Supreme Court.

Cur. adv. vult.

The Court delivered the following written judgment:—

May 10 Dixon, Williams and Webb JJ.

This is an appeal from an order of Edwards J. reducing the amount of an annual sum which in a wife's suit the Registrar in Divorce had ordered the husband to secure to her for her life and otherwise confirming the Registrar's order.

The suit was founded on desertion and, upon an application made by the petitioner shortly after decree absolute it was ordered that the respondent in the suit should secure to the petitioner for her life and to the satisfaction of the court an annual sum of £286, the Registrar of the Court to settle and approve proper deeds or instruments to be executed by all necessary parties and that a trustee should be appointed by agreement of the parties or nominated by the Registrar in default of agreement. The order went on to require the respondent to give security over certain real property and over the sum of £1,250 in cash, which sum might be invested by the trustee. The order made by Edwards J. confirmed this order except that the annual sum was reduced from £286 to £260 and that a life assurance was substituted for the sum of £1,250 cash. The petitioner has appealed against this order and the respondent in the suit has cross-appealed.