ANYANWU V. THE QUEEN

• Pages: 222-225

222



NIGERIAN SUPREME COURT CASES

[1963] N.S.C.C.

spondent to abandon her matrimonial home, and that she had not the intention to

return to her husband.

The next question is, since the wife deserted in 1939, was the husband under

any duty to take her back in 1951 when she returned? Although the learned Judge,

in his judgment, did no say the husband was under any such duty, he nevertheless



5

put the blame on the husband for not taking his wife back in 1951: he (the Judge)

was unable to understand why the husband had only the children to stay with him,

and not the wife as well. On this point, it is not clear from the evidence that the

wife herself made an offer to return. It does not appear there was such an offer,

for according to the husband he thought by his having the children the children to



10

stay with him, it might help to bring him and the wife together again. In the end, the

wife merely came one day, collected the children and disappeared once again.

It only remains to say that it is obvious to me, and apparently to the learned

Judge from the letters in evidence in this case, that this marriage has broken down

completely, and the Respondent herself by her letters, Exhibit C and D, made it



15

clear that she had given cause for it and had expected that the petitioner had di-

vorced her and married again. There is hardly any sense in trying to keep up a

marriage which has obviously broken down completely - see

Blunt v. Blunt

(1933)

A.C. 517 at P. 524. It appears to me that all the learned Judge tried to do was to

keep up this marriage, which obviously the wife has terminated by her act.



20

My view of the matter is that the learned Judge was wrong to have found that

the wife Respondent did not desert in 1939. It was obvious she did, and the hus-

band's petition was wrongly dismissed.

I would, therefore, allow the appeal. The order made by the learned Judge is

hereby set aside, and I propose the following order -



25

A

decree nisi

be made that the marriage between Olufela Charles Sowande

and Mildred Bernice Marshall celebrated in London on the 20th September 1936,

be dissolved.

Taylor, F.J.

I concur.

Bairamian, F.J.

I concur.



30

Appeal allowed.

ANYANWU V. THE QUEEN

CYRIL ANYANWU



APPELLANT

V

THE QUEEN



RESPONDENT

SUIT NO. FSC 54/1963

FEDERAL SUPREME COURT

BRETT,



F.J.

TAYLOR,



F.J.

BAIRAMIAN,



F.J.

1st July, 1963.

Legislation - Evidence Act, s. 159 proviso (d) exception (iii)

35

40

45

50

Criminal Law - Accused person giving evidence against co-accused Liability to

cross-examination as to character or convictions.