Copy of “ཤ་ད་ཀན་ཐོ་” by Crown Solicitor.
It is necessary to prove.
1. The first marriage ceremony.
2. That it was valid.
3. The identity of the parties.
4. That the wife and husband were living in England at the date of the second marriage.
A. The best evidence would be that of a person present at the marriage ceremony acquainted with both the parties, supported by certified extract from the Registers.
(2.1. The Evidence of the wife is admissible against the husband, but not so if it comes from her alone. It would be useless for her to come to Hongkong.)
B. Failing the above, the evidence of an intimate friend of both parties who can prove their identity with the persons named in the marriage certificates would be sufficient.
Page 150
Page 151
:
It
Copy of
ཤ་ད་ཀན་ཐོ་”་ by
Crown Solicitor.
is marsary to prove.
1. The first marriage ceremony.
2.
That it
valid.
3. The identity of the partico.
4. That the wife
f
148
c. o.
33941
IRES
Rear 27 SEP C1
were living in England at the date
the second marriage.
A. The best cridence would
be that of
a
person
present at the marriage ceremony acquainted with
both the parties, supported by certified extract
the Registers.
V
the wife
(2.1. The Evidence
admissible against the husband,
not
so
if
from
wold
be uselars
for
her to come
to
Hongkong.)
B. Failing the above,
the cridance
.
relatin
A
intimate friend of
The
both parties who
can
farove their identity with the persons named in
be sufficient.
marriage certificates would
와
the
Page 150Page 151
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.