Maintenance Defaulter Gets Periodic Imprisonment on Weekends
Charles claimed that his business, which supported both him and Renee, would crumble if he were locked away.
Maintenance Defaulter Gets Periodic Imprisonment on Weekends
A jaw-dropping courtroom showdown unfolds as a South African man faces a mind-boggling sentence, bound to raise eyebrows.
Pastor Chauke Defaults on Maintenance Payments
Charles, the man at the centre of this astonishing saga, is now facing an unthinkable fate – to spend weekdays at his job, and weekends behind bars.
The epic drama begins with Charles and Renee, a once-happily-married couple entangled in a seemingly endless divorce battle, which has been dragging on for a whopping five years.
According to reports by renowned legal practitioner Tina Hokwana, Renee, the determined ex-wife, took a bold step and applied for interim maintenance while the divorce battle raged on, citing the urgent need for financial support under the legal banner of a “Rule 43 application.”
On a fateful day, May 4, 2021, the scales of justice tipped in Renee’s favour.
The court issued a ruling against Charles, ordering him to open up his wallet and provide a monthly allowance to cover Renee’s expenses, along with paying specific bills directly to service providers.
To add fuel to the fire, Charles was also slapped with the responsibility of coughing up an initial sum for Renee’s legal fees, all under the ominous shadow of the “Rule 43 order.”
Charles, apparently unimpressed with the court’s decision, refused to comply with the Rule 43 order. Renee on the other hand fired back with a “contempt of court” application.
On June 19, 2021, Charles found himself on the wrong side of the law, convicted of contempt for not following the court’s directives.
Maintenance Defaulter Gets Periodic Imprisonment on Weekends
He was then given a 14-day stint behind bars, a sentence that hung in suspension pending the eventual resolution of their divorce, provided he cleared all his arrears in maintenance payments.
However, the court heard that Charles defied its ruling. Once again, he failed to play by the rules, making late payments and coming up short on the required cash contributions.
Fuming with frustration, Renee swooped in with an “urgent application” to have him locked up.
It wasn’t until Charles was served with this dire ultimatum that he decided to settle his outstanding arrears.
In the courtroom showdown that followed, the judges had to decide whether it was time to throw the book at Charles and enforce the suspended sentence, or if there was room for some adjustments.
Based on the presented evidence, the court had an epiphany – Charles could meet some of the conditions attached to the suspended sentence.
He did, after all, eventually pay his overdue maintenance, a hefty sum that covered more than 14 months of cash payments.
Charles, desperate to avoid the ominous bars of prison, came up with an intriguing argument. He claimed that his business, which supported both him and Renee, would crumble if he were locked away.
In response, the court conjured up an unconventional solution. Instead of locking Charles away full-time, they suggested a shocking twist – periodic imprisonment on weekends.
The idea behind the court’s decision was to allow him to run his business, rake in an income, and keep the financial wheels turning, all while meeting his obligations to Renee.
