Court says vexatious former husband abused legal system to harass ex-wife

A Gauteng man has to obtain the court’s permission to bring any legal action against his former wife after he was declared a vexatious litigant. Picture: Pixabay

A Gauteng man has to obtain the court’s permission to bring any legal action against his former wife after he was declared a vexatious litigant. Picture: Pixabay

Published Mar 8, 2022

Share

Pretoria - A fed-up ex-wife approached the court to have her former husband declared a vexatious litigant because he has been dragging her constantly to court over the years for frivolous reasons – only to irritate and annoy her.

The Gauteng High Court, Pretoria agreed with the wife, who cannot be identified as most of the litigation pertains to their divorce and children.

The court declared the husband a vexatious litigant and ordered that he may only institute fresh proceedings against her if the court gave him the green light to do so.

The court was told the husband ran to court on every possible occasion against his wife, who had to incur legal costs on each occasion as she had to obtain a lawyer.

To make matters worse, the husband lost nearly every case he brought against his wife and was handed with the legal bill after each occasion.

Only, he never paid the legal bills as he said he was under financial administration and thus cash strapped.

The latest application brought against his wife alleged she is a “bad” parent, as she allowed one of their two children to attend school while there was a Covid-19 positive case at the school.

But, as the mother pointed out to the court, the school had contingency plans in place and all the children were allowed back at school.

The father, however, insisted that she was not a suitable parent and he applied for sole custody.

That application was ongoing, but the mother asked the court to order that the husband post a R160 000 security for the legal costs of this case, before he could pursue this matter.

Judge Mashudu Munzhelele agreed and said only if he paid the money as security, was he allowed to continue with this application.

But the judge had put her foot down for further applications without the court’s consent.

The husband has launched countless applications over the years since he and his wife were estranged.

He even “obtained some orders” which the court frowned upon as it was uncertain who, if anyone, issued the order.

Judge Sulet Potterill earlier ordered an investigation into how the husband obtained an order overturning a protection order his wife earlier obtained against him.

The husband brought at least four urgent applications – one after the other – to try and overturn the protection order against him.

It was remarked in court that it seemed as if he continued with these until he could find a judge to see his point of view.

But all were in vain, until he eventually and mysteriously obtained an order in this regard.

It cannot be established which judge issued this order.

Judge Potterill meanwhile rescinded this order.

Another questionable order pertained to the couple’s divorce.

The husband had the police serve the divorce order on his wife.

She was surprised to have received the decree of divorce, as the divorce was defended by her (she disputed certain aspects) and according to the wife it was still pending.

It was also not clear from the divorce document when the “divorce order” was granted.

The true divorce order in terms of which the parties reached certain agreements, was only issued three years later.

Meanwhile, in opposing the application to have him declared a vexatious litigant, the husband said the wife was the vexatious one, as she was trying to block his constitutional right to litigate.

The wife, on the other hand, said he simply wanted to see her financially drained, as he kept on losing his cases without settling the legal bills.

In referring to the mysterious order obtained and under investigation, the judge said it showed how desperate the husband was to harass his wife.

“He resorted to improper means to achieve what he wanted,” the judge said.

Judge Munzhelele referred to the decree of divorce which was improperly obtained, and later rescinded by the court until the true divorce proceedings took place.

The judge said the husband persistently abused the legal processes for improper purposes and said it was time the court put an end to it.

Pretoria News