Actress demands R13 million house from world-renowned SA DJ in divorce lawsuit
Pretoria - A house of at least R13 million, R1.5m for furniture, R80 000 a month maintenance for their two children and R50 000 a month for herself for the next five years.
These are some of the demands made by a well-known actress in the divorce proceedings against her world-famous DJ husband.
While the DJ’s name is known to the Pretoria News, a Johannesburg judge who issued a judgment following the couple’s legal wranglings, only referred to the case as M vs M.
This is because the Divorce Act precludes divorcing couples embroiled in legal proceedings, of being identified.
The wife told the Johannesburg High Court that apart from the other run-of-the-mill expenses her husband must foot, she also wanted another car – of the same standard as the one she has now – on the fifth anniversary of their divorce.
But their divorce has been stalling for some time, as the couple cannot see eye to eye on some of the issues.
The wife instituted divorce proceedings in 2019. The estranged couple agree that their marriage has broken down, but cannot agree on the financial aspects of the split.
Apart from her other demands, the wife also wants the husband to pay her medical, dental, hospital surgical, ophthalmic, orthodontic and prescribed pharmaceutical expenses, for five years from the date of divorce.
While the husband accepted liability for maintaining the children and some other expenses, he is, among others, objecting to the amount she is claiming for the children as well as the maintenance she is demanding for herself for the next five years.
The wife said in court papers her husband was an extremely wealthy individual, earning up to R100 million per annum. This is not disputed by the husband, who also admits that the children should reside with his wife, as he “travels the world to pursue his profession as a world-class disc jockey”.
It is said the husband is considered the second richest musician in Africa.
The parties entered into a customary marriage in community of property in May 2011. In January 2017, they entered into a civil marriage.
Before entering into the civil marriage, they concluded an antenuptial contract in which they, among others, agreed that upon dissolution of the marriage, the husband would pay to the wife an agreed amount of R4m in complete discharge of all his patrimonial obligations to the respondent, including spousal maintenance. The wife, who is disputing the legality of the antenuptial, told the court she wanted to appoint a forensic auditor to undertake a forensic investigation of the respondent’s offshore and local assets.
She also wanted a comprehensive investigation to determine the value of the “joint estate” that, according to her, still exists between the parties and in which she is entitled to share.
She is also disputing the validity of the civil marriage.
Judge PA Meyer said the issues could not be determined at this stage, as the wife must first be given the opportunity to investigate her husband’s financial affairs through a forensic accountant, if she wanted to.