Rintoul v Rintoul
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judgment Date | 22 October 1898 |
| Docket Number | No. 5. |
| Date | 22 October 1898 |
| Court | Court of Session |
Lord Adam, Lord Kinnear, Lord President.
Minor and PupilCustody of Infant ChildWife in desertion.
A wife having left her husband, taking the infant son of the marriage with her, the husband presented a petition for custody of the child. The wife lodged answers in which she made a general averment of cruelty against her husband, and stated that she was about to raise an action of separation. At the date of the hearing the child was ten months old, and the wife had not raised an action of separation, although three months had elapsed from the date when her answers were lodged.
The Court granted the husband's petition for custody.
Alexander Fotheringham Rintoul, Jedburgh, presented a petition craving the Court to find him entitled to the custody of his child, Richard Rintoul, and to ordain his wife, Margaret Johnston Wood or Rintoul, to deliver the child to him, or to those having his authority, the child to remain in his custody; or otherwise, to find that the petitioner is entitled to free access to the child at all reasonable times.
The petitioner stated:He had been married in February 1897, and the child had been born on 29th December 1897. He had always treated his wife with kindness. She had deserted him twice without reason, and he had received her back and given her everything she desired for herself and her child. She had deserted him a third time in June 1898, and had gone to live with her father. She had sent away the child two days before her desertion. He had urged her to return, but she had refused.
Mrs Rintoul lodged answers on 21st July 1898. She admitted that she had left her husband on the occasions mentioned, and that she refused to return or part with the child, but stated that she had left the petitioner, on account of his cruel treatment of her. She cannot safely return to him, and is about to raise an action of separation and aliment against him. He is very much given to drink, and is very unkind to her both when drunk and sober. He uses very bad language. He is quite unfit to be the custodier of the child It is only six months old.
Argued for the petitioner;The answers were irrelevant. There was no relevant averment of cruelty on the part of the petitioner, and no facts were averred shewing him to be unfit to be the custodier of the child. She had had ample time to raise her threatened action of separation, and had not done so. The wife must, therefore, be held to be in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Scottish & Newcastle Plc v Raguz
...for summary judgment under CPR Part 24, unless the contents of the application notice are to be relied on as evidence: see CPR 22.1( 1)(f), 22(3). But 24 PD 2(3) requires the application notice to state that "the applicant knows of no other reason why disposal of the claim or issue should a......
-
Swanby v Tru-Square Homes Ltd,
...$27,288.66 $1,364.44 $28,653.10 1-F-19 43 01/12/15 $26,048.67 $1,302.43 $27,351.10 1-F-21 45 02/01/15 $44,655.04 $2,232.76 $46,887.80 1-F-22 47 02/20/15 $14,927.19 $746.37 $15,673.56 1-F-23 48 03/19/15 $78,050.12 1-F-24* 52 04/06/15 $38,368.26 $1,918.42 $40,286.68 1-F-26 53 04......
-
Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd v Generic Health Pty Ltd
...of denials should be struck out Legislation: Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 4 Federal Court Rules 2011, rr 16.06, 16.21(1)(f), 22.07, 30.11 National Health Act 1953 (Cth) Cases cited: Batistatos v Roads and Traffic Authority of New South Wales [2006] HCA 27; (2006) 226 CLR 256 ......
-
MH v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP)
...the various mobility descriptors. The parties’ arguments on the relationship of mobility descriptors 1b and 1e to mobility descriptors 1d and 1f 22. The central issue we were called upon to consider was the relationship of mobility descriptors 1b and 1e to mobility descriptors 1d and 1f. Mr......
-
State and Local Tax Insights -- Winter 2013
...Revenue Servs., 2010). Connecticut also does not allow a subject to tax exception for combined returns. 21 Md. Code Ann., Tax-Gen. § 10-306.1(f). 22 Conn. Gen. Stat. § 12‑216a; Info. Pub. 2010(29.1) (Conn. Dep’t of Revenue Servs., Dec. 28, 2010). 23 Info. Pub. 2010(29.1) (Conn. Dep’t of Rev......
-
Planning for Tax Controversies Before, During and After the Deal: New Dynamics in Cross-Border M&A Under the TCJA
...foreign income corporation under Reg. §1.965-1(f )(17), and Target Subsidiary 2 was an E&P deficit foreign corporation under Reg. §1.965-1(f )(22). The amount of the Code Sec. 965(b) aggregate Target Subsidiary 2 deficit in post-1986 E&P reduced what oth- erwise would have been the U.S. Tar......
-
Renewable Electricity, Refined Coal, and Indian Coal Production Credit
...line 4e. For all other production of electricity or refined coal, report the applicable part of this amount on Form 3800, Part III, line 1f . . 22 For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see separate instructions. Cat. No. 14954R Form 8835 Instructions for Form 8835 Renewable Electricity, Refin......
-
Import Duties (General) (No. 10) Order 1976
...18% M,D 2% C1 16% F.I.a) F 19% M,D 3% C1 16% b) F 18% M,D 2% C1 16% II. F 17·5% M 1·5% C1 16% E 16% 20.02 G.I. F 21·2% M,D 2% C1 19·2% II.a)1. F 22·2% M,D 3% C1 2. F 22·2% M,D 3% C1 19·2% b)1. F 21·2% M,D 2% C1 19·2% 2. F 21·2% M,D 2% C1 19·2% III.I.a)1. F 19·6% M,D 2% C1 17·6% 2. F 19·6% M......
-
Chapter 117, SB 137 – An Act concerning the implementation of integrated pest management policies in public and private schools, and supplementing Title 13 of the Revised Statutes.
...school, as appropriate, to all parentsor guardians of children attending a school, and staff members of aschool or school district. C.13:1F-22Development of model school integrated pest managementpolicy. 4.a. No later than 12 months after the effective date of this act,the commissioner, in......