A Gauteng couple, entangled in a bitter divorce since 2012, faced another application in the South Gauteng High Court in Johannesburg. The husband sought a reduction in maintenance payments and other modifications.
The couple, married out of community of property in January 2004, has one child born in 2007.
Their child was five years old when the divorce proceedings began, and she is now 17 years old.
A 2021 family advocate report indicated that she spent almost her entire childhood amidst the stress, tension, and animosity of the high-conflict divorce proceedings, resulting in very little time spent with her father.
The bone of contention revolves around maintenance and the outstanding R3 million, dating back to 2012, that the husband owes for the wife’s legal fees.
In his application, the husband claimed he was not in a financial position to settle the R3 million, citing a lack of liquid assets and the inability to access such a substantial amount of money.
He explained that his financial circumstances deteriorated significantly due to the Covid-19 pandemic. He reported not earning a salary from April to August 2020, which led to his inability to meet his full maintenance obligations during that period.
Furthermore, he said he has debt of over R1.4 million as well as two personal loans owing to the tune of R320,000 and over R2.3 million.
He also claimed to have exhausted all his savings, cashed in his investments, and sold most of his movable assets, including his inheritance from his grandmother, which he used to pay for his child's school fees. Additionally, he reduced his life insurance policies from R29 million to R2.9 million.
He said he is struggling to comply with the maintenance and related obligations of the court order because he is representing himself in court, while his wife is represented by a senior attorney and senior counsel.
In her reply, the wife claimed that the husband is extremely wealthy with substantial cash reserves.
She alleged that he has an interest in two businesses: Lexshell 365 (Pty) Ltd, which she believes owns property worth around R50 million, and Amalgamated Global Trading, which she asserts was acquired for R2 million in cash.
She added that she earns over R29,500 but has shortfall of approximately R44,000.
The court noted that the wife’s expenses include several luxuries: a personal trainer costing R2,900, hairdressing at R2,300, beautician treatments at R1,100, magazines and books at R350, perfumes and cosmetics at R3,000, dining out at R3,600, entertainment at R1,100, and holidays at R3,870.
Acting Judge Leigh de Souza-Spagnoletti, after reviewing the evidence, concluded that the husband was not living extravagantly and found it highly unlikely that he had significantly reduced his standard of living solely to mislead the wife and evade his maintenance obligations.
The judge added that the wife seeks to live a lifestyle of a time long passed - a time when the husband had not been dispossessed of his biggest assets and the parties had not spent 12 years litigating and spent over R10 million in legal fees for a marriage that did not even last that long.
The judge said the husband should only pay R28,000 monthly maintenance to his ex-wife and all reasonable expenses relating to their child’s school or tertiary education.
He was also ordered to repair his wife’s car and pay for the insurance and tracker.
He is also responsible for the wife’s R18,000 monthly rental and also contribute R15,000 towards her moving fees.
IOL News