Husband faces jail in maintenance battle

A JOHANNESBURG businessman, who says he has assets running into more than R19 million, ignored a court order that he had to pay his wife R65 000 maintenance a month pending their divorce.

He now risks finding himself in jail if he does not pay up.

The Johannesburg High Court gave the man a month in which to pay the arrears in maintenance to his estranged wife. He can also find himself in jail if he does not pay R250 000 towards her legal costs of the divorce within 30 days.

Acting Judge A de Wet was so upset with the disdain the man showed towards the court which issued the earlier maintenance order that he slapped the man with a punitive costs order.

The judge said the man was clearly in contempt of court and placed his own needs above the court order, and thus his wife.

The wife, a home maker, initially asked the court to commit her husband to one year in jail for not paying maintenance.

She was also upset as the court in May this year ordered the man to hand over the current licence disc of the Porsche Panamera she drove within 48 hours of that order.

She said for this alone he should face jail time. But Judge de Wet pointed out that while being late, the husband did hand over the disk 11 days later. He thus did not deserve punishment for this.

He, however, had to continue paying for the monthly instalments of the Porsche.

The husband, who owns several businesses, told the court that he simply could not pay what the court had earlier ordered.

He said Covid-19 took its toll on his businesses and that he had to juggle his money between his various bank accounts to keep his creditors at bay.

But the court scrutinised his bank accounts and concluded that apart from his about R19.3m in assets, he had plenty of money in his various accounts to pay his wife as he was ordered.

The judge said that after all, she was entitled to the lifestyle she had had while they were still together.

The judge also commented that rather than pay as he was obliged to do in terms of the law, the man first took care of his own “excessive” needs. He said the man knew there was a court order in place which he could not simply ignore.

“If regard is had to the daily use of the respondent’s (the husband’s) credit cards and bank accounts, the court notices regular payment of expenses which cannot constitute necessary expenses of the respondent and are clearly expenditure on a lavish lifestyle,” the judge said.

He noted that numerous purchases were made virtually on a daily basis at Woolworths, various upmarket restaurants, luxury purchases, Netflix, entertainment and payment of traffic fines.

All these were made while the husband faced a jail sentence for contempt of court.

The judge remarked that in spite of the downturn in the economy and the effect of the pandemic on the businesses and his income, the husband appeared to continue to enjoy a lavish lifestyle.

“I cannot but conclude that the respondent’s conduct demonstrates that he had scant regard for his obligations under the rule 43 order. He continued with his chosen lifestyle. He did not deny himself the luxuries of life.”

The judge also noted that the husband paid his debts to creditors, colleagues and friends, and ensured that there were sufficient funds to meet his own maintenance needs, while he claimed there was not enough money to pay his wife.

“The respondent could and should have arranged his affairs differently, but elected not to do so,” the judge said.

He gave the husband a month to turn things around or face prison.