49 / 336
in England was fully considered by McCardie J. i'
Buttcrworth
v.
Butlcrworth
—L.R. (1920) Pfobate 126
The following principles, laid down in that judgment
apply to Ireland.
(1) Sincc the action was not historically one for
trespass, b u t ' a n action on the case, mere proof of
adultery did not entitle the husband to damages —
actual loss and injury had to be shown.
(2) Punitive or exemplary damages could not be
awarded, and damages were restricted to what could
be regarded as compensatory in respect of the loss and
injury suffered.
(3) In awarding compensatory damages, regard
should be had to (a) the actual value of the wife to
the husband, and (b) the proper compensation to the
husband for the injury to his feelings, the blow to his
marital honour and the hurt to his matrimonial and
family life.
(4) As to the value of the wife, this in turn can
he considered on two aspects (a) the pecuniary aspect
•n relation to which her fortune and her assistance in
her h u s b a n ds business and such allied matters are
relevant, and (b) the consortium aspect in re ion to
which the wife's general qualities as a wife and mother
and her conduct and general character are relevant.
(5) With respect to damages for the injured feeling
°f the husband, moderation, rather than undue
severity, should be the principle. The conduct of the
defendant can be of "the greatest importance. Any
feature of treachery, any grossncss of betrayal, any
wantonness of insult, may deeply add to the husband's
sense of injury and wrong, and therefore call for a
larger award, not as exemplary damages, but as
appropriate compensation.
(6) The character and conduct of the husband is
as fully in issue as the character and conduct of the
wife.
If punitive damages are ruled out. in what manner
should the Court consider the award of £15,000 in this
case? There was no pecuniary loss, nor was there loss
of consortium, since, at the time of the adultery, the
plaintiff and his wife were living apart. From the
evidence the husband accepted news of his wife's
Infidelity rather philosophically. Since September, 1972,
l
he husband returned to Ireland to live with his wife,
and has lived with her ever since. The award of
LI 5,000 is consequently grossly punitive and excessive.
With regard to the Judge's charge, the defence of
condonation was never opened to the jury, had been
abandoned at the trial, and should not have been
brought to the notice of the jury by the Judge. The
Judge in his charge suggested that the wife could
nave had intimate relations with two other men in
the district. Without proof, this was quite inadmissible,
as questions directed to a wife with a view to estab-
lishing her misconduct are essentially matters in
issue. For these and other minor reasons, the trial
m
u s t be set aside and a new trial ordered.
(Maher
v. Collins — Full Supreme Court per
Q,
Higgins C.J.—unreported—4 December, 1974.)
Correspondence
Office of the Revenue Commissioners,
Dublin Castle,
Dublin 2.
5 March, 1975.
James J„ Ivers, Esq.,
Director General.
Dear Sir,
I am directed by the Revenue Commissioners to
refer to your recent enquiry regarding the types of
payments to be included in the recently designed
Forms 8-2 (Solicitor) and to state that the payments to
be included are payments such as those listed below:—
(i) Interest or dividends on National Loans, Exchequer
Bonds, National Savings Bonds,
National
Development Loan, and Exchequer Stock.
Interest on Bank Accounts or Deposits.
Interest from any Local Authority, where paid
without deduction of tax;
Interest from the Agricultural Credit Corporation,
Ltd., the Electricity Supply Board, Coras Iompair
Eireann or Bord na Mona where paid without
deduction of tax;
Interest on dividends on British War Loans or
other British and Northern Ireland Government
Securities and Savings Certificates;
Interest on shares or on deposits in Building
Societies in Great Britain and Northern Ireland;
Income from Securities, Stock, Shares, Rents or
any other possessions outside the State;
Discounts on Exchequer Bills or British Treasury
Bills;
Other Interest, Annuities, Annual Payments, etc.,
not subject to Irish Income Tax at source.
(ii) Sums of which the Solicitor is in receipt, which are
paid under his authority to bankers or other
persons acting on his behalf, should, unless
taxed by deduction to Irish Income Tax, be
included in the Form 8-2 (Solicitor).
Yours faithfully,
G. McStravick.
45