Court reduces maintenance executive pays to wife after he loses lucrative job

A business executive embroiled in an acrimonious divorce has obtained a court order reducing his financial responsibilities towards his wife and child, pending finalisation of the matter.

In an interim order granted in 2019, the man was ordered to pay R50,000 maintenance to his wife, and pay medical and education expenses for his minor child. The wife had use of  one of the family's vehicles.

The interim maintenance was this week reduced by the court because of his changed financial circumstances.

The couple, married with an ante-nuptial contract including the provisions of an accrual regime, agreed that their marriage had irretrievably broken down. One child, aged nine, was born of their union.

However, a number of issues needed to be adjudicated at the divorce hearing, which was initially set to begin in November last year.

In her particulars of claim, the woman is seeking an order that she and her child be allowed to continue to reside in the former matrimonial home in the Western Cape, that the husband pay her R50,000 per month towards the maintenance of their minor child and that he pay her R100,000 a month for the rest of her life.

This maintenance is in addition to the minor child's educational and medical expenses.  She is also seeking a claim for her medical expenses. This is in addition to the transfer of an immovable property in Johannesburg and the implementation of the terms of the antenuptial contract entered into between the parties.

She has elected to pursue her claims against her husband without legal assistance.

After the institution of divorce proceedings in 2019, the Western Cape High Court ordered — pending the finalisation of the divorce proceedings — that in addition to the maintenance amount, medical and educational expenses and the use of the Mini Cooper Countryman vehicle, the woman must vacate the former matrimonial home by the end of March 2019. 

However, the woman refused to vacate the home despite arrangements for reasonable alternative accommodation provided for in the 2019 order.

On the first day of the trial in November last year, the wife requested it be postponed. This was opposed by the husband.

The court postponed the matter and placed it on the pretrial judicial case management roll for January 31. After the postponement, the husband proceeded with his variation application of the current interim financial relief.  

The husband contended the amounts he must pay in terms of the interim order, including the costs of the former matrimonial home, were between R165,000 and R170,000 a month.

He said his income had been reduced from about R243,000 a month to about R95,000 after losing employment in 2021. He also submitted that all his capital reserves had been depleted.

The husband also tendered a transfer of the immovable property in Gauteng to the woman. 

This property was bond free, and after the tender, he signed an offer to purchase another property for himself in Gauteng. At the time, the man was employed and earning a substantial salary with benefits.

Before finalising his purchase of this Gauteng property, his employment contract was terminated in November 2021.

He could not proceed with the purchase of the property as he needed to make the required bond payments and repay the loans made to him by a third party to enable the purchase of the property.

The husband said the amount of maintenance sought from him was predicated on the fact that his wife would vacate the former matrimonial home in terms of the interim order.

He wanted to rent the former matrimonial home to supplement his disposable monthly income to comply with the interim order granted in her favour.

“The applicant’s case is that, given his current state of unemployment, he cannot meet his monthly financial commitments from his disposable income,” judge Derek Wille said.

The court agreed with the man in its order on Monday, saying the evidence he presented in his variation application was convincing.

“He makes a case for a variation based on a material change in circumstances. I say this because: (a) he is no longer in full-time employment; (b) he cannot, in his circumstances, seek full-time employment; (c) he has used up his capital and his reserves and; (d) he is dependent to a large extent on friends and family to supplement his income,” Wille said.

By contrast, the woman had savings, had disposable assets and derived income from a trust.

“Under these circumstances, the appropriate order is to grant a reduction in the interim financial relief and that the costs stand over for determination at the trial action,” Wille said.

If the woman does not leave the Western Cape home, the husband was ordered to pay R25,000 in cash maintenance for the mother and minor child, down from the current R50,000.

In the event she moves out of the home, the court ordered the husband pay to the landlord of the premises rented by her R35,000 a month, together with any rental deposit required. That deposit shall be repayable to him once she vacates the rented accommodation. In addition  the man must pay R35,000 maintenance to his wife and child.

TimesLIVE

Support independent journalism by subscribing to the Sunday Times. Just R20 for the first month.