This is from the National Archives:
In England and Wales suits for divorce and nullity are terminated in two stages: by a decree nisi which after an interval of six weeks may in general be made absolute.
This interval, which is useful for a number of reasons, also enables the Queen's Proctor to make inquiries into such suits, if it is suspected that the decree nisi has been improperly obtained because, for example, material facts have not been brought to the notice of the court.
Any person who has relevant information may supply this to the Queen's Proctor whose duty it is to enquire into the matter.
The Queen's Proctor may take steps to show cause why a decree nisi should not be made absolute, or he may at an earlier stage of the proceedings and with the leave of the court intervene in the suit.
The Divorce Court itself has power to refer cases to the Queen's Proctor for inquiry, and in suits where difficult points of law arise the court may ask for the assistance of the Queen's Proctor to present legal argument. This last procedure is most useful where a legal problem arises in an undefended suit and it may not be possible to obtain full legal argument in any other way.
So it sounds on the face of it that he had not fully disclosed all the facts to the court.
Records are available at the National Archives and are subject to the 75 year rule. Here is the reference if you want to follow it up.
S 29 Title:
HM Procurator General: Registers of Divorce Cases
Registers containing epitomes of matrimonial cases in which HM Procurator General has shown why a decree nisi should not be made absolute, or has intervened or assisted the Divorce Court as amicus curiae.
The numbers in the volumes indicate the related files.
Date: 1875-1977 Related Material: The main series of divorce files are in J 77
Held by: The National Archives, Kew Legal status: Public Record Language: English Physical description: 17 volume(s) Access conditions: Subject to closure for periods up to 75 years
Hope this helps