Angelina Jolie has been dealt another legal blow in her bitter battle with Brad Pitt over their Chateau Miraval property, DailyMail.com can reveal. The Tomb Raider actress, 48, was ordered by a judge in LA Superior Court to release every NDA she signed with a third party over an eight-year period from 2014 – the year they got married – to 2022. Documents detailing the judge’s decision have been made public as part of the ongoing ‘War of the Roses’, with the A-list couple locked in a bitter battle over the right to sell the vineyard and their French home. Jolie sold her $62 million stake to Russian billionaire Yury Shefler in 2021, which Pitt said went against their agreement to give the other party the right of first refusal.
The NDA has become a key battleground in the dispute over Chateau Miraval after Jolie announced she backed out of their agreement because Pitt, 60, had asked her to sign one as part of a business agreement their . She claims it was an ‘unconscionable’ attempt by her ex-partner to ‘control her’ after they split in April 2019, and his lawyer asks LA Superior Court to overturn sale because they agreed not to sell to third parties. But Pitts’ lawyers have argued that Jolie’s objection to the NDA was really just a cover story she made up to ‘rationalize’ her betrayal of Pitt by deciding to sell her shares her behind his back.
The Fight Club star’s lawyers also claim that Jolie herself ‘weaponized’ the NDA and asked Pitt to sign a broader NDA just six months later as part of their divorce settlement negotiations. Pitt’s legal team asked in previous filings that she come clean about the NDAs she entered into with third parties, including employees. In the ruling announced Wednesday, Judge Lia Martin dismissed Jolie’s objection that her NDA was “irrelevant,” agreeing with Pitt’s team’s motion. She asked the actress to present all NDAs that she proposed or that were proposed to her by others, regardless of whether they were finalized or agreed to.
The ruling also requires Jolie to present NDAs signed by the companies she controls, as well as documents reflecting her or her companies’ reasons for requesting the agreements within 60 days. Paul Murphy, one of Jolie’s lawyers, told DailyMail.com that the judge’s order also opens the door for the actress to request documents related to Pitt’s alleged abuse. “Conventional NDAs are simply not comparable to Mr. Pitt’s last-second request to attempt to cover up his personal wrongdoing,” Murphy said. ‘We are happy to overturn them and we are pleased that the Court acknowledged that the only potential relevance was the unconscionability of Mr Pitt’s conduct, a material issue which has now been confirmed in this case.’
He continued: “The judge’s ruling completely opens the door to discovery of all issues related to Pitt’s mistreatment.” We welcome the transparency in the findings response by all parties, including Mr. Pitt’s. ‘Angelina looks forward to the final end of this litigation and the false narratives that continue to hurt the family and hinder their ability to heal.’ However, a source close to Brad said Jolie’s decision to use the NDA as a strategy “backfired spectacularly.” ‘Her defense has been exposed like a house of cards and she will now have to provide details of all the NDAs she requested against third parties. ‘There is no doubt that this is a major setback for her. There is a long way to go, but in the context of the case so far, this is an extremely important and far-reaching ruling that will make her defense difficult,” the source said. more.
The incident comes less than two weeks after Jolie was accused of trying to drive a wedge between her estranged husband and their six children following their split , according to court documents filed in LA Superior Court. In an explosive statement seen by DailyMail.com, a former bodyguard of the couple was informed by his own contractors that Jolie was pushing her children to stay away from Pitt now that she has custody of them. Former British SAS soldier Tony Webb worked for the family for more than 20 years, starting in 2000, but claims Jolie fired him after two of his security guards sided with Pitt following the split. hand.
According to documents filed by Pitt’s lawyers in May, Webb claims that two colleagues were told by Jolie’s personal assistant that she ‘would sue’ after it emerged that they might give evidence in The couple’s custody battle. Documents submitted to the court, seen by DailyMail.com, say Webb’s colleagues told him he overheard Jolie ‘encouraging the children to avoid spending time with Pitt during visits’. His statement accuses Jolie of repeating her threat to sue the bodyguards in a follow-up email, in which Pitt’s lawyers used those statements as part of their move to force the actress to reveal her details. revealed her use of NDA.
NDAs are not typically used to silence witnesses about to testify in court proceedings, although despite the threats, Webb said during the hearing that both of his colleagues testified under summons. His comments were part of a motion Pitt’s team has now won, in which Jolie was called a ‘hypocrite’ for suggesting he wanted to use an NDA in the sale of vineyards in Their Dharma to ‘control’ her – despite regularly silencing its own staff with similar contracts. Pitt’s team argued that Jolie was “improperly” using the NDA. In an earlier separate legal filing, Pitt’s lawyer John Berlinski argued that Webb’s evidence showed Jolie had ‘weaponized’ the NDA in an attempt to keep the couple’s ‘family matters’ private.
He added: “What Jolie claimed was so sacred to her that Pitt’s proposed NDA caused her to renege on her agreement to sell to him. ‘Jolie’s use of NDAs to silence her security details and attempt to prevent them from testifying truthfully in court about what really happened behind closed doors bears striking similarities to the allegations. Jolie’s (false) accusation in this case is that Pitt improperly used the NDA to ‘silence’ her. ‘The only reason this motion is before the Court is because of Jolie’s plot to turn this business dispute into a sideshow of family court matters. ‘In short, the determination that NDAs were a common feature of Jolie’s personal and professional life, and entirely customary for her, directly affects the credibility of the plea her— regardless of the precise terms or subject matter of any particular NDA.’
He went on to accuse Jolie of using the NDA proposal to ‘introduce into this case unfortunate circumstances regarding the breakdown of the couple’s marriage, claiming the proposal caused a ‘devastating’ reaction. spiritually’ in her.’ Berlinski added that her timeline “doesn’t work,” asserting that the confidential deal Pitt proposed was offered after she “opened negotiations” with the Russian billionaire. The arguments come after Pitt scored several legal victories in his battle over the winery, including a landmark ruling in Luxembourg that handed him back control of the award-winning vineyard in pending further hearings. In March, the LA high court dismissed allegations that his lawsuit was ‘frivolous, malicious and part of a problematic matter’.
However, a source close to Angelia said Brad only fought for the NDA as further revenge against the actress. “Pitt and his team knew that these NDAs would never see the light of day at trial,” a source told DailyMail.com. ‘They also know that this will force Angie to spend resources tracking all this information, which is just another way to drain her resources and punish her for leaving.’
