The reason why the court should be alert to detect and turn back attempts, to bring petitions under s. 3(d), which should properly be brought under s. 4(1) (e) (i), was aptly stated by Denning L.J. in Kaslefsky v. Kaslefsky, [1951] P. 38, [1950] 2 All E.R. 398, where he said at p. 403: “If the door of cruelty were opened too wide, we should soon find ourselves granting divorce for incompatibility of temperament. This is an easy path to tread, especially in undefended cases. The temptation must be resisted lest we slip into a state of affairs where the institution of marriage itself is imperilled.”
"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.