SADO et al. v. NONABABA et al.

 

Present: Mr. Justice Wood Renton and Mr. Justice Grenier.

 

SADO et al. v. NONABABA et al.

 

D.C., Galle, 8,108.

 

    Malicious  prosecution-Husband and wife defendants-Misjoinder- Waiver-Liability of husband for wife's tort-Dolus mains.

    Where a husband and wife who were married after the passing of Ordinance No. 15 of 1876 were sued in one action for damages for malicious prosecution and judgment was entered against them, and no objection on the ground of misjoinder was taken in the lower Court-

    Held, that the action was wrongly constituted, inasmuch as the causes of action were separate and distinct and could not be joined under   section   11   of   the   Civil   Procedure   Code.

    Sadler v. The Great Western Railway Co.1 and Appuhamy v. Marthelis Rosa 2 followed.

 

Held, that the objection to mis joinder of causes of action not having    been    taken    at    the    trial    could    not    be    entertained    in    appeal.

 

Held, that a husband married after the coming into operation of Ordinance No. 15 of 1876 is not liable for his wife's independent tort, and that no judgment could be

Click Here to Read the rest of this document