Court dismisses KZN businesswoman seeking to end R10,000 maintenance towards her husband due to his lavish lifestyle
The wife argued that her husband was not a candidate for maintenance as he was spending money on alcohol and plane tickets.
Image: Pexels
A businesswoman who wanted to stop paying spousal maintenance to her estranged husband was dismissed by the Mpumalanga High Court due to lack of evidence.
The couple is involved in divorce proceedings instituted by the husband in November 2023. Pending the finalisation of the divorce proceedings, the court granted an order in February 2024 where the wife had to pay the husband R10,000 every month and R50,000 towards his legal fees.
After almost a year of paying, she sought relief in the high court claiming that her financial circumstances have changed. She said her farming business in KwaZulu-Natal was hit by natural disaster after the snow hit the province around September 2024, resulting in reduced income for her business.
She placed her monthly income at R17,400 after deducting all the operational expenses associated with the running of the farm.
In addition, she said her child was autistic and secured admission at a boarding school where the fees are R199,000. She further stated that her parents had undertaken to cover the expense while she remains liable for ancillary expenses, which according to her calculation, were over R197,000.
She said the child is also receiving therapeutic treatment for his condition. She is responsible for the payment of the fees charged by the therapist which are not covered by the medical aid.
Over and above the changed circumstances, she said the husband was not a candidate for maintenance as he was spending the money meant for his upkeep to sustain a life of luxury by spending on plane tickets, alcohol, and payment of legal fees. For this argument, she relied on the entries shown on the bank statement as well documentation received from the attorneys.
She said the husband was now employed but failed to disclose the details of his salary. He is also not contributing towards the welfare of the child, even though he is able to do so.
The husband opposed the application, saying the wife had not made a full and honest disclosure of her financial position to enable the court to assess her affordability to pay maintenance towards him. He denied that he is spending money on alcohol and the legal fees of his attorneys. He said his legal fees are paid for by his sister.
To prove her financial positions, the wife submitted an affidavit regarding the changed circumstances in October 2024. As part of her financial disclosures, she submitted statements of cash flows from February 2024 until December 2024. There was also an undated letter from Absa confirming the rejection of her credit application. She also relied on a statement from an accountant confirming that the business had incurred a loss of R1.9 million as a result of the severe weather conditions. The letter further stated that the business would require outside funding to remain operational.
Acting judge Mangena presided over the matter and acknowledged that the wife's business was affected by the snowstorm as it this was clear from the payout she received from her insurance policy.
However, judge Mangena said it was not clear from her papers the extent to which the snowstorm affected her cash flow and financial ability to continue with the business.
"The reliance on the cash flow and management accounts statements is, in my view, inadequate to support the claim that she is unable to continue with the payment of R10,000."
The judge said the wife, on her own version, capitalised the business to the tune of over R4 million but alleges that this money was a loan, and yet failed to disclose how this money was secured, as well as the terms of repayment.
Moreover, she had been able to honour her payment obligations towards the school, her business, and the husband's maintenance for the past 11 months following the devastating storm, and she hasn't missed any payments.
"There is no evidence that the business is in distress and that she has taken steps to reduce its operational expenses. There is no information as to how she is managing to pay all these expenses. The only item she wants off her list of payments is the maintenance of the respondent (husband)," said the judge.
Her application was subsequently dismissed.
sinenhlanhla.masilela@iol.co.za
IOL News
Get your news on the go. Download the latest IOL App for Android and IOS now.