Mel Viljoen, Peet Viljoen, Real Housewives van Pretoria, Tammy Taylor SA, nails, salon,

Mel and Peet Viljoen, the owners of Tammy Taylor SA. Image via Instagram @melanyviljoen

‘RHOPTA’ star Mel Viljoen to appeal against ‘Carte Blanche’ producer

Tammy Taylor Nails SA owners Peet and Mel Viljoen are back in the spotlight after their decision to appeal against ‘Carte Blanche’s’ Catherine Barry.

Mel Viljoen, Peet Viljoen, Real Housewives van Pretoria, Tammy Taylor SA, nails, salon,

Mel and Peet Viljoen, the owners of Tammy Taylor SA. Image via Instagram @melanyviljoen

Die Real Housewives van Pretoria (RHOPTA) cast members and Tammy Taylor Nails South Africa co-owner Mel Viljoen has made the decision to file a notice of appeal against Catherine Innes Barry – a producer at Combined Artist Productions and a representative of Carte Blanche.

ALSO READ: ‘She is a mean girl’: ‘RHOPTA’ viewers unimpressed with Mel Viljoen

MEL VILJOEN TO APPEAL AGAINST ‘CARTE BLANCHE’S’ CATHERINE BARRY

According to Dubai Daily, the reality TV star – who is married to former lawyer Peet Viljoen – accused Barry of trespassing and harassment her during and after the shooting of the M-Net investigative show last year.

The Tammy Taylor Nails SA boss said that the journalist barged into her office unannounced and further remained hours after the Carte Blanche crew was done filming. Barry reportedly admitted under oath to trespassing.

ALSO READ: ‘I’m a street kid: ‘RHOPTA’s’ Peet Viljoen on being a ‘vicious boss’

SUING FOR R20 MILLION

Speaking to The South African last year, weeks after their controversial episode aired, the Viljoens vehemently stated that they were suing the Carte Blanche journalist. Peet revealed that his wife was suing Barry for R20 million for defamation of character for the knock her reputation allegedly suffered.

Peet further revealed that Barry accused his wife of paying two South African Police Service officers to deliver an interim protection order to her in an attempt to intimidate her and in doing so was committing the unlawful act of corruption.

ALSO READ: Inside ‘RHOPTA’ star Peet Viljoen’s ‘347 corruption charges’

In the court papers made available to The South African, questions were raised on whether Barry made a recording of the statements the police officers served and if she did, only a part of the recording was used by her employers, Carte Blanche, in an episode aired on M-Net on 30 October 2022.

“The only reasonable inference that can be drawn is that the recording including the defamatory statements made, was in addition published to the employees at Carte Blanche, the names and details of said employees the publication would have had to be made to, is unknown to the Plaintiff,” read the order.

ALSO READ: ‘Never seen him steal’: ‘RHOPTA’s’ Peet Viljoen in court next month

‘CARTE BLANCHE’ RESPONDS

Carte Blanche has since disputed Viljoen’s claims, saying that theirs and Barry’s attorney, Webber Wentzel, were informed on 27 November 2023 that no notice of appeal had been filed by Viljoen at the Harassment Court or the Magistrates Court in Pretoria.

“No notice of appeal has been received by Barry, Carte Blanche or Webber Wentzel.”

The show also said that on 21 November this year, the Magistrate’s Court, for the District of Tshwane Central, sitting as the Harassment Court, dismissed Viljoen’s application for a protection order.

“In the judgment, received on 27 November 2023, the Magistrate ruled: the evidence placed before the court was sufficient to satisfy the Magistrate that there was merit in investigating the allegations against Viljoen. The Magistrate held that Viljoen’s right to privacy could never trump the right of freedom of the press or media.”

Carte Blanche further revealed that, according to the ruling, their journalist did not harass Viljoen and that she “acted at all relevant times in the scope of her employment as an investigative journalist.”

“In respect of Viljoen’s defamation lawsuit against Barry, this lawsuit was filed on 25 November 2022 as Viljoen claimed that she had been defamed due to wrongful and defamatory statement made by Barry.

“This was disputed and these claims were denied in the plea filed by Catherine Barry on 9 February 2023. Viljoen has not taken any further steps to progress the matter since February 2023.

The M-Net production said that Barry has filed a counterclaim against Viljoen for R20 000.

“Her argument is that Viljoen wrongfully and intentionally violated her privacy by sending South African Police Service members to her private address to deliver the application for a protection order.”

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE ARTICLES BY NOKUTHULA NGCOBO