In this case, however, there were no circumstances making it necessary or expedient for the plaintiff to submit to sexual relations with the defendant at the time that it happened; she, had left the defendant’s home and had been living with her father for nearly a year. Further than that, she had brought this action against the defendant in which judgment had been rendered and for which an appeal was pending, and so, to some extent she must have been cognizant of her legal position. One act of sexual intercourse is conclusive evidence of condonation in the case of a husband, who has performed it with his wife after knowledge of adultery: Cramp v. Cramp [1920] P. 158, 89 LJ.P. 119, 36 T.L.R. 333; Turnbull v. Turnbull (1925) 41 T.L.R. 507. There seems to be no logical reason to hold why the same degree of evidence should not suffice to bar a wife where, as here, it is shown she has not been subject to any compulsion.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.