[imagesource:rawpixel.com]

In Gauteng, a couple embroiled in a prolonged and bitter divorce since 2012 found themselves once again before the South Gauteng High Court in Johannesburg.

The husband had filed an application seeking a reduction in maintenance payments and other financial modifications, a reflection of the ongoing disputes that have plagued their separation.

The couple had been married out of community of property in January 2004 and had one child, born in 2007. Divorce proceedings began when their child was just five years old, and now, at 17, she has spent much of her life caught in the middle of a high-conflict divorce that has cost millions and not nearly enough time with her father.

A 2021 report by a family advocate highlighted the significant impact of the prolonged legal battle on the child, noting the strain and tension that pervaded her upbringing and the limited time she spent with her father as a result.

IOL reported that the primary issue at hand was the question of maintenance and an outstanding R3 million that the husband owes for his wife’s legal fees, a debt dating back to 2012.

In his application, the husband argued that he lacked the financial resources to settle this debt, citing his deteriorating financial circumstances, exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. He explained that he had not earned a salary between April and August 2020, which hindered his ability to meet his full maintenance obligations during that period.

The husband also detailed his current financial situation, which included debts exceeding R1.4 million and personal loans amounting to over R2.3 million. He stated that he had exhausted his savings, cashed in his investments, and sold most of his movable assets, including an inheritance from his grandmother, which he had used to pay for their child’s school fees. Additionally, he reduced his life insurance policies from R29 million to R2.9 million.

Representing himself in court, the husband claimed he was struggling to meet the maintenance obligations imposed by the court, while his wife had ample support, represented by a senior attorney and senior counsel – which he had to pay for.

In her response, the wife alleged that the husband was still wealthy, with substantial cash reserves. She asserted that he had interests in two businesses: Lexshell 365 (Pty) Ltd, which she claimed owned property worth approximately R50 million, and Amalgamated Global Trading, which she alleged was acquired for R2 million in cash.

The wife then highlighted her own financial difficulties, despite earning over R29,500 per month, stating that she faced a shortfall of approximately R44,000 each month.

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.

After reviewing the evidence, Acting Judge Leigh de Souza-Spagnoletti concluded that the husband was not living extravagantly and found it unlikely that he had significantly reduced his standard of living solely to evade his maintenance obligations. The judge observed that the wife appeared to be seeking a lifestyle that reflected a past era, one before the husband had been forced to liquidate his assets and before the couple had spent 12 years and over R10 million in legal fees.

In her ruling, the judge ordered the husband to pay R28,000 in monthly maintenance to his ex-wife and cover all reasonable expenses related to their child’s education. He was also directed to repair his wife’s car, pay for her car insurance and tracker, and contribute to her monthly rental and moving expenses.

Maybe they should include extensive therapy costs as well, for the child certainly, but also for mom and dad at this rate.

[source:iol]