Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
Subject_1 Husband and Wife Subject_2 Nullity of Marriage Subject_3 Impotency Subject_4 Inference of Incapacity on Part of Wife.
G., pursuer , brought an action against his wife G., defender , for nullity of marriage on the ground of impotence, or alternatively, for divorce on the ground of desertion.
The facts of the case and the import of the evidence appear from the opinion of the Lord Ordinary, who on 30th March 1922 dismissed the action.
Opinion .—“The pursuer here asks for decree of nullity on the ground that his wife is incapable of consummating the marriage, and alternatively for decree of divorce on the ground that her unwillingness to consummate the marriage amounts to desertion in terms of the statute. Cases of nullity when they are strenuously defended present questions of difficulty, and in the present case I have found the questions raised by the evidence peculiarly perplexing.
There is no structural defect in this case and no evidence whatever of any nervous or hysterical affection which, had Page: 131 ↓
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.