Callwell v Callwell and Kennedy

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
CourtProbate, Divorce and Admiralty Division
Judgment Date03 May 1860

English Reports Citation: 164 E.R. 1274

IN THE COURT OF PROBATE AND IN THE COURT FOR DIVORCE AND MATRIMONIAL CAUSES.

Callwell
and
Callwell and Kennedy

Referred to, Le Sueur v. Le Sueur, 1876, 1 P. D. 143; Niboyet v. Niboyet, 1878, 4 P. D 18.

(Before the Full Court and a Special Jury,-The Jiidge Ordinary, Willes, /., and Hill, J.) callwell v. callwell and kennedy. May 3, 1860.-Dissolution of an Irish Marriage.-Parties Domiciled in Ireland.-Adultery.-Damages -Arrangement bv Counsel as to Amount.-Settlement of Damages.-Marriage Settlement.- Where a husband was domiciled in Ireland, and had only a temporary abode in England at the date of filing the petition, and the wife appeared and submitted to the jurisdiction of the Court, the Full Court dissolved their marriage, which had been celebrated in Ireland, on the ground of adultery committed by the wife in England and on the Continent.-The Court is not at liberty to recognise an agreement made between the counsel of the petitioner and co-respondent in respect of the amount of damages to be paid, but is bound by the asseasment of the jury.-Where the petitioner had entered into a covenant binding his estate with the payment of an annuity to the respondent, in the event of her surviving him, the Court directed the annuity, when recovered, to be paid for the benefit of the children of the marriage. [Referred to, LeSueurv. LeSueur, 1876, 1 P D. 143; Niboyetv. Niboyet, 1878, 4 P. D 18.] The petition in this case was filed by a gentleman domiciled in Ireland, William Callwell, Esq , described in the petition " as of Newberry, Kilcullen, in the County of Kildare, Ireland, but at the present time residing at 35 Bury Street, St James's," for a dissolution of his marriage with the re-[260]-spondent, on the ground of her adultery with the co-respondent, from whom he claimed 3000 damages. The respondent and co-respondent had respectively entered appearances, and had filed answers denying the adultery charged. The case came on for trial before the Full Court and a special jury, when, Dr Phillimore, Q C., and Dr. Tristram, appeared for the petitioner. Mr. T. Jones for the respondent. Mr. Serjeant Pigott and the Hon. R. Bourke for the co-respondent. It appeared by the evidence that the marriage was celebrated in Ireland, according to the rites of the United Church of England and Ireland; that the petitioner and respondent, both before and after the marriage, and up to the time of the adultery complained of, had resided in...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases
  • Brooks v Brooks
    • United Kingdom
    • Family Division
    • Invalid date
    ...Law Reports 1. Bown v Bown and Weston [1949] P 91; [1948] 2 All ER 778. Re Cairns (1982) 4 FLR 225. Callwell v Callwell and Kennedy (1860) 3 Sw & Tr 259. E v E (Financial Provision) [1989] FCR Gulbenkian v Gulbenkian [1927] P 237. Jump v Jump (1883) 8 PD 159. Leadbetter v Leadbetter [19......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT