Court clears ex-wife from R10.9m debt

In her contentions, the ex said her separation was concluded on August 2, 2019 and she was just presented with the application for sequestration of the joint home on Walk 20, 2020.

She added that while the couple were as yet hitched, her ex traded properties without her assent. He likewise purchased a house and a vehicle for his sister with the returns of the joint domain which in the end prompted their separation.

She said regardless of whether it is observed that there is a lawful premise that her domain be sequestrated, there is no legitimacy in the leasers' establishing papers that credits the direct of her ex to her.

She contended that she can't be rebuffed for the careless lead of her ex in directing his business undertakings which she didn't have anything to do with on the grounds that she is an educator.

Judge ML Senyatsi concurred with the ex's contentions, saying there is no legitimate premise why the ex's different domain ought to be impacted by the sequestration of the ex.

"I have this perspective in light of the fact that at the hour of the application for sequestration the gatherings were at that point separated. It does not matter on the off chance that the home of the gatherings was not separated after separate," he said.