Dearman v Dearman [1916] HCA 24

Dearman v Dearman [1916] HCA 24

The wife's behaviour, while justifying the husband's belief that she committed adultery, was not sufficiently persistent or accompanied by refusal to discontinue as to establish an intention to break off matrimonial relations; thus, constructive desertion by the wife was not established. Both appeals on grounds of desertion fail and are dismissed.

Parties
Appellant and Respondent: Melbourne Nathan Dearman; Appellant and Respondent: Daisy Gertrude Dearman
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 April 1916
Procedural Posture
Divorce / Matrimonial / Appeal From the Supreme Court of New South Wales
Outcome
appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Divorce, Desertion, Constructive Desertion, Matrimonial Proceedings
Family Law Divorce Desertion Constructive Desertion Matrimonial Proceedings

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Melbourne Nathan Dearman

Appellant and Respondent

Daisy Gertrude Dearman

Appellant and Respondent

Procedural Posture

Divorce / Matrimonial / Appeal From the Supreme Court of New South Wales

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether either party was guilty of desertion justifying dissolution of marriage
  2. 2 Whether the conduct of the wife amounted to constructive desertion

Ratio Decidendi

The wife's behaviour, while justifying the husband's belief that she committed adultery, was not sufficiently persistent or accompanied by refusal to discontinue as to establish an intention to break off matrimonial relations; thus, constructive desertion by the wife was not established. Both appeals on grounds of desertion fail and are dismissed.

Court Disposition

appeals dismissed

Orders

  • Both appeals are dismissed
  • Respondent to pay costs of appeal and £10 10s. for costs before Commissioner