In the latest chapter of the ongoing legal battle between Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie, Jolie has voiced strong objections to Pitt’s demands for her to disclose all Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs) she’s ever signed.
This request is part of their contentious dispute over a $500 million winery, an asset both valued during their marriage.
The High Stakes of Privacy and Past NDAs
Angelina Jolie, at 48, finds herself in a fierce legal struggle with 60-year-old Brad Pitt, focusing now on her history of NDAs. Pitt’s legal team has made a move that Jolie’s lawyers describe as “expensive,” “wasteful,” and “unreasonable,” claiming it serves to extend an ongoing pattern of abuse.
According to court documents, the crux of the issue lies in a non-disclosure agreement Pitt allegedly wanted Jolie to sign, linked to their failed deal over Miraval, the winery they co-owned. This NDA, according to Jolie, was not about business but also aimed at silencing her on Pitt’s alleged abusive behavior towards her and their children during a 2016 flight from France to California.
The Battle Over Miraval
The legal tussle centers around Miraval, a prized asset acquired in 2008, which became a point of contention after Jolie filed for divorce in 2016. When negotiations to sell her share back to Pitt fell through, reportedly due to his demanding an restrictive NDA, Jolie sold her stake to a subsidiary of Stoli Group. Pitt contested this move, claiming it was done unfairly.
Intrusive Demands and Privacy Concerns
The heart of the current legal argument is Pitt’s request for Jolie to turn over all NDAs she might have signed throughout her extensive career, not those related to their personal or business dealings. Jolie’s lawyers argue this is an invasion of privacy that affects not only her but also the privacy of third parties involved in those agreements.
These documents could cover sensitive information related to her compensation and that of others, an overreach that Jolie’s team deems irrelevant to the case at hand. They stress that this move by Pitt is another attempt to harass and intimidate Jolie, as it would expose private matters and is a costly and unnecessary legal maneuver.
The Court’s Role in a Sensitive Issue
With a hearing scheduled for May 16, the legal battle is set to continue, with no full trial expected this year. Jolie’s legal representatives have highlighted the broader implications of Pitt’s demands, suggesting that they exemplify the difficulties domestic violence victims face in court.
The argument extends beyond the specifics of NDAs, touching on issues of power, control, and the ability to silence alleged abuse. Jolie’s team is pushing back against what they see as an attempt by Pitt to dig up almost two decades of contractual history to undermine her stance on his alleged abuse.
Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie’s Personal Lives on Trial
Throughout this ordeal, Jolie has maintained that her primary concern has been the health and well-being of her family, wishing to move forward. Her attorney, Paul Murphy, has emphasized the difference between typical NDAs for confidentiality at work and those intended to cover up personal misconduct, denouncing Pitt’s comparison as “shameful.”
As the legal proceedings unfold, both Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie are navigating not only the complexities of their high-profile divorce but also the public and legal scrutinizing of their past and present actions. This case is not about the sale of a winery or the specifics of contractual agreements but a deeper look into how personal relationships and legal obligations intersect in the lives of public figures.
The outcome of this dispute will likely resonate beyond their immediate concerns, setting a precedent for how privacy, abuse, and business dealings are handled in the public eye for years to come.