Ridiculous! Judge laughs Uyanda's demands outta court
JOBURG socialite and businesswoman Uyanda Mbuli's court application for R86000 in spousal maintenance was rejected this week.
Her demand totalled a staggering R119000 a month, of which R86000 was for her self-aggrandisement.
Her estranged husband is IDC marketing head Sisa Mbuli, who earns an annual package of R1,2m with a claimed take home pay of R45000 and reported expenses of R55000 a month.
Presiding Judge Fayeeza Kathree- Setiloane spared no wrath when she lambasted Uyanda for leading an exorbitant lifestyle that was far beyond her means.
When the judge heard her R10000 monthly claim for her son, she asked: "What is this, the queen of England's son?"
She lashed out at her for failing to lodge a realistic application.
But Judge Kathree- Setiloane was not sympathetic to Mbuli's husband either, reducing him to a sobbing loner after she refused to take further newspaper clippings to bolster his case.
Uyanda did get something, but it was nothing near her demands.
She is an award-winning style icon and founder of Diamond Face Couture.
She was demanding that her husband pay R119000 a month. Of which R86000 was for spousal maintenance, R23000 for monthly expenses and the other R10000 for the child.
The visibly stunned judge retorted: "Please be realistic. How on earth is the respondent expected to pay all of this from a nett salary of R45000 a month?"
The couple tied the knot 10 years ago in community of property and are still living under the same roof, a double-storey Kyalami Estate home.
But the court heard that the two have been leading separate lives for the past two years and are awaiting the division of their estate, which is to be dealt with during divorce hearings.
So the monthly expense figure of R23 000 is apparently for their joint expenses. This included R1000 for cleaning materials, as well as wages for the domestic worker and gardener.
Their separation has been marred by controversy, with both applying for protection orders against each other.
The beauty queen once spent a night in jail for allegedly violating her court order against her husband.
Uyanda's advocate Jones Willcock argued that her client had no source of income and was virtually living off friends and family.
She said Uyanda had taken loans from family and friends and needed to repay them.
Willcock argued that her hubby could afford to pay her client the money she was demanding because he had shares in MTN, farms in the Eastern Cape, owned a flat in Cape Town and had business interests from a close corporation (CC), yet he had been silent on his earnings.
"And your client too has an exorbitant standard of living," said the judge.
Willcock argued that her client was a celebrity who needed to maintain the life of luxury she is accustomed to.
The judge asked her to tone down her figures to be more realistic. Willcock then reduced the figure from R86000 to "R35000 or R40000".
Sisa said his wife refused to buy groceries, to pay for phone bills or the salaries of the gardener and domestic worker.
"Virtually, the applicant is having a free ride, living under my roof and eating my groceries. I should be the one asking for maintenance from her," he said.
"She took a decision to buy those cars. I'm still driving a 2005 BMW. I'm not in a position to afford that," said Mbuli.
"I'm not prepared to pay for anything regarding the upkeep of the complainant.
"She's frivolous in her claims, she has a fashion business and can afford this."
Willcock presented an affidavit and argued that because of a smear campaign in the media by Sisa, her client's major sponsors had cancelled their contracts with her due to bad publicity.
Sisa answered that his wife was qualified but refused to seek employment and that he took care of all her needs.
"But I do not see the reason why I should now support an extravagant lifestyle."
Judge Kathree-Setiloane said it was difficult for her to act in the parties' best interests.
"This is what happens when parties are not honest and frank with this court. You will both have to deal with the consequences of the decision that I will make, even if it does not make you both happy."
The case was then postponed to Friday when, in a last ditch attempt, Sisa tried to present a new application.
The judge would have none of it.
He then broke down and cried.
Back after a short period for him to compose his emotions, the judge ordered him to pay his wife R7500 a month, with the first instalment due on August 20, and to pay all expenses for their child, including his medical aid, his school fees, extra mural activities.
"If the minor child takes an excess of two extra mural activities, consent of the respondent should first be heard before such further expenses are incurred," she said.
"The respondent is ordered to further make payments on the monthly bond instalments for their matrimonial home, as well as payment of salaries for the domestic worker and the gardener."
The hubby was ordered to pay for groceries and cleaning materials, rates and taxes for their home, Telkom landline, DStv subscription, his wife's medical aid and monthly instalments of R5573 for her Saab, as well as the monthly insurance premiums.
He was also instructed to contribute R5000 towards costs of the court application.
Sisa refused to comment, simply saying: "My lips are sealed."
His wife was absent on the day of judgment.