Kaslefsky v Kaslefsky

Core Citations

---

REFERS TO

• Squire v Squire
• Usmar v Usmar
• Lauder v Lauder

APPLIES

• Westall v Westall

REPORTED OPINION OF in

• 66 TLR (Pt 2) 616
• [1951] P 38
• [1950] 2 All ER 398

[See more]

• 66 TLR 616

CONSIDERED in

• Ivens v Ivens
• Swan v Swan
• Leslie Hazel (Petitioner Appellant) v Ethel Iris Nellie Hazel (Respondent Respondent)

[See more]

• Baker v Baker
• E.O.D. v V.E.D.
• E v R and F
• Mdm v Ehm
• Leslie v Leslie
• Seymour v Seymour
• Williams v Williams
• D v D
• Matthew Miles Hulse v Creslyn Ann Hulse
• Lockhart v Lockhart
• M v M
• P v P
• K v B
• S v L

CITED in

• Simpson v Simpson
• Fowler v Fowler
• Woollard v Woollard

[See more]

• Cox v Cox

REFERRED in

• Ward v Ward
• Evans v Evans
• P. (D.) v P. (J.)

[See more]

• Sheldon v Sheldon

DISTINGUISHED in

• Wright v Wright

APPLIED in

• Cooper v Cooper (No. 1)
• Eastland v Eastland
• Windeatt v Windeatt (No. 2)

FOLLOWED in

• Gollins v Gollins

DISAPPROVED in

• Gollins v Gollins

This document cites

---

• Lauder v Lauder
• Westall v Westall
• Squire v Squire
• Usmar v Usmar