“While [Weinkove] regrettably made numerous improper remarks‚ sometimes entailing unnecessary personal comments about [the advocate]‚ we disagree with the contention that he was patently biased‚” Majiedt and Rogers said in their judgment on Wednesday.
They said some of Weinkove’s conclusions were “bereft of any reasoning” and others were not borne out by facts.
The acting judge said the member of the Johannesburg Bar snared a “trophy wife” 25 years his junior‚ got her pregnant and forced her to sign a contract barring her from claiming maintenance if the marriage broke down. Then he “systematically divested his estate of assets” with the “calculated objective of placing them beyond his wife’s reach”.
“For a senior counsel to conduct himself in this manner is nothing short of scandalous‚” the judge said. His behaviour had put his wife “on the verge of a mental breakdown” and she “even considered suicide”.
The couple married in Germany in July 1992‚ 10 days before the wife‚ then 28‚ delivered the first of their two children. During their marriage the husband bought‚ built and sold various properties‚ including homes in Auckland Park‚ Saxonwold and Parkview‚ in Johannesburg; a house neighbouring Bishops school in Rondebosch‚ Cape Town; farms in Mpumalanga‚ the Western Cape‚ Namibia and France; and a house in Windhoek.
When the marriage broke down‚ the advocate adopted a “scorched earth” approach to the divorce‚ which involved dragging out proceedings over 53 court days‚ said Weinkove.
Divorce drama: 'Arrogant' advocate condemned for 'almost driving wife to suicide'
A senior advocate who was ordered to pay his wife R11.1-million after a six-year divorce battle has had the amount reduced to R4.4-million on appeal.
But the 79-year-old’s ruined reputation has suffered a fresh blow. His behaviour has been roundly condemned by his senior colleagues.
A High Court judge said “the concept of chivalry is beyond his comprehension and lies dead and buried in his mind‚ if it ever existed”.
Supreme Court of Appeal judges Stevan Majiedt and Owen Rogers said the advocate‚ who may not be named‚ was argumentative‚ arrogant‚ obdurate‚ mendacious‚ evasive and tendentious.
Majiedt and Rogers rejected the advocate’s argument that Acting Judge Leslie Weinkove had embarked on “a calculated crusade of character assassination” in his 2016 judgment in the High Court in Cape Town‚ and dismissed an allegation of bias.
Till wealth us do part: black women turn to divorce
“While [Weinkove] regrettably made numerous improper remarks‚ sometimes entailing unnecessary personal comments about [the advocate]‚ we disagree with the contention that he was patently biased‚” Majiedt and Rogers said in their judgment on Wednesday.
They said some of Weinkove’s conclusions were “bereft of any reasoning” and others were not borne out by facts.
The acting judge said the member of the Johannesburg Bar snared a “trophy wife” 25 years his junior‚ got her pregnant and forced her to sign a contract barring her from claiming maintenance if the marriage broke down. Then he “systematically divested his estate of assets” with the “calculated objective of placing them beyond his wife’s reach”.
“For a senior counsel to conduct himself in this manner is nothing short of scandalous‚” the judge said. His behaviour had put his wife “on the verge of a mental breakdown” and she “even considered suicide”.
The couple married in Germany in July 1992‚ 10 days before the wife‚ then 28‚ delivered the first of their two children. During their marriage the husband bought‚ built and sold various properties‚ including homes in Auckland Park‚ Saxonwold and Parkview‚ in Johannesburg; a house neighbouring Bishops school in Rondebosch‚ Cape Town; farms in Mpumalanga‚ the Western Cape‚ Namibia and France; and a house in Windhoek.
When the marriage broke down‚ the advocate adopted a “scorched earth” approach to the divorce‚ which involved dragging out proceedings over 53 court days‚ said Weinkove.
South African men are failing to keep their wives happy
I had a secret Spier rendezvous with my mistress‚ says Jason Rohde
The appeal judges agreed with Weinkove that the clause in the ante nuptial contract waiving her claim to maintenance was unenforceable and unconstitutional‚ before they embarked on a lengthy appraisal of the advocate’s complex estate.
“The stark reality is that we will never be able to establish the exact value‚” they said. But they concluded that it was worth R8.9-million and awarded the wife half‚ to be paid by December 1.
They also reversed Weinkove’s order that the advocate should transfer half of the R6-million matrimonial home in Rondebosch to her‚ buy her an upmarket car every six years and pay her maintenance of R30‚000 a month.
Saying that the wife‚ now 53‚ should be able to earn at least R20‚000 a month‚ they reduced maintenance payments to R8‚500 a month from September 2018.
They acknowledged that the advocate would have to sell the Rondebosch home – now entirely his in terms of their judgment – and probably a farm in Wellington to meet his financial commitments‚ which include his wife’s costs of R2-million in the High Court divorce battle.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.
News and promos in your inbox
subscribeMost read
Latest Videos