Shahid Siddiqui has lost his bid to reduce a US$500,000 divorce payout in Harare. His ex-wife lives in Australia, and he wanted smaller payments. But Justice Fatima Maxwell was not sold on his claim that he could no longer afford the deal.
The amount came to AUD700,000 under a deal he made with Marina Pamela Siddiqui. He had paid AUD342,519, worth about US$240,800 or R4 million, and wanted to clear the rest at AUD15,000 a month. That works out to roughly US$10,550 or R175,300 per payment.
His main reason? Business had been rough at Property World (Pvt) Ltd. He claimed the firm was not doing as well as it had before, which had hurt his ability to pay.
The issue was the lack of hard proof. Maxwell had just five months of business accounts to review, with no past records to show how much the firm's finances had changed. Without a clear before-and-after view, his case had a major gap.
Marina was not having it either. She said he was already late with AUD138,334, or about US$97,250, and R1.62 million from an earlier bill under their deal.
And the math did not quite work in his favor. His proposed AUD15,000 monthly plan came to AUD180,000 per year, around US$126,550 or R2.10 million. Their deal called for AUD183,344 each year, about US$128,900 or R2.14 million.
Maxwell made it clear that a bad deal, in hindsight, was not a valid reason to get new terms. A person had to prove a real shift in their finances, not just say that money was tight.
Section 9 of the Matrimonial Causes Act gave Siddiqui a way to ask for a change. Yet that law still required a sound case, and the judge found his proof lacking.
The pair had married in 2021 and reached their divorce deal in 2024. Siddiqui later sought to revise the terms in 2026, but the court rejected his request. The same payment rules still apply.
The amount came to AUD700,000 under a deal he made with Marina Pamela Siddiqui. He had paid AUD342,519, worth about US$240,800 or R4 million, and wanted to clear the rest at AUD15,000 a month. That works out to roughly US$10,550 or R175,300 per payment.
His main reason? Business had been rough at Property World (Pvt) Ltd. He claimed the firm was not doing as well as it had before, which had hurt his ability to pay.
The issue was the lack of hard proof. Maxwell had just five months of business accounts to review, with no past records to show how much the firm's finances had changed. Without a clear before-and-after view, his case had a major gap.
Marina was not having it either. She said he was already late with AUD138,334, or about US$97,250, and R1.62 million from an earlier bill under their deal.
And the math did not quite work in his favor. His proposed AUD15,000 monthly plan came to AUD180,000 per year, around US$126,550 or R2.10 million. Their deal called for AUD183,344 each year, about US$128,900 or R2.14 million.
Maxwell made it clear that a bad deal, in hindsight, was not a valid reason to get new terms. A person had to prove a real shift in their finances, not just say that money was tight.
Section 9 of the Matrimonial Causes Act gave Siddiqui a way to ask for a change. Yet that law still required a sound case, and the judge found his proof lacking.
The pair had married in 2021 and reached their divorce deal in 2024. Siddiqui later sought to revise the terms in 2026, but the court rejected his request. The same payment rules still apply.
