Application for R150 000 monthly allowance by Markus Jooste’s alleged girlfriend dismissed

Former Steinhoff chief executive Markus Jooste. Picture: Armand Hough/African News Agency (ANA)

Former Steinhoff chief executive Markus Jooste. Picture: Armand Hough/African News Agency (ANA)

Published Jul 10, 2023

Share

Cape Town - The Western Cape High Court has dismissed an application by former Steinhoff chief executive Markus Jooste’s alleged girlfriend to have the SA Reserve Bank (SARB) release money in the form of a monthly allowance of R150 000 from previously frozen blocked funds.

Jooste’s friend, Berdine Odendaal, also wanted SARB to pay her legal expenses, based on an alleged agreement between the parties, and relying on an alleged breach of her constitutional rights. SARB blocked the funds.

SARB argued that it was not in the public interest to allow any person to benefit from exchange control contraventions in the absence of justifiable and compelling circumstances for the release of any such blocked funds under these regulations.

The matter goes back to the aftermath of the exposure of the Steinhoff scandal.

At the time, one of the companies that ostensibly benefited from the accounting irregularities at the instance of Steinhoff was Mayfair Speculators, a South African company which Jooste ostensibly controlled.

Odendaal received about R60 million from Mayfair Speculators and this led SARB to suspect that she had benefited from contraventions of the exchange control regulations in which Jooste and Mayfair Speculators were involved and froze the accounts.

Odendaal’s attorneys wrote to SARB with a request for it to allow her access to all the money in her blocked bank accounts in order to cover her fixed monthly expenses and living costs, as well as her legal costs.

SARB agreed with conditions and then Odendaal’s lawyers wrote: “With respect to the ‘allowance’ granted to our client, our client has opened another account.”

When, in February 2022, Odendaal launched a high court application seeking an order directing the SARB to pay her legal fees from her blocked account in addition to the monthly R150 000, SARB argued that the request constituted a repudiation of the earlier agreement.

Odendaal argued that SARB’s cancellation of the agreement was not valid.

Dismissing the application Judge Wille said: “The applicant (Odendaal) insisted on terms inconsistent with the correct interpretation of the agreement by launching the present application and demanding payment of legal expenses in addition to the R150 000 monthly payment.”

He ruled that as such the contractual obligation to release the monthly R150 000 from the funds in the blocked Nedbank account was validly terminated.

[email protected]

Cape Argus