Brad Pitt reveals how he was ordered to hand over documents that could prove he was abusive towards Angelina Jolie and kids: ‘It was a horrible experience, I was… See more

Angelina Jolie has scored a major legal victory against ex-husband Brad Pitt after a judge ruled that he must hand over documents and communications which could prove he was abusive towards the actress and their children.

The former A-List couple seem determined to dredge up the past and throw everything they can at each other amid their acrimonious legal battle for their French vineyard.

The ongoing dispute has seen the feuding exes attack each other in legal filings ever since Pitt sued Jolie in 2022 for selling her stake in their Chateau Miraval estate, which produces an award-winning sparkling rosé.

Legal filings seen by DailyMail.com show that the communications Pitt, 60, has been ordered to produce begins the day Jolie claims he abused her on a private plane shortly before their separation in 2016.

She previously accused him of pouring red wine and beer over his ex and one of the couple’s children on a private plane.

Pitt has always denied being abusive and was cleared by law enforcement following an investigation – though his ex-wife claimed in filings that his ‘history of physical abuse’ started ‘well before’ the plane incident.

Jolie, 49, asked the court to force her ex-husband to disclose anything between September 14, 2016 to December 31, 2018.

That will include emails, texts and other written communications, but nothing between him and his attorneys or therapists.

The Maleficent actress filed documents in July claiming that the actor tried to force her to sign an $8.5million NDA to cover up ‘years of abuse.’

At the same time, her legal team asked that the court compel Pitt to disclose ‘private, third-party communications’ he had about their family’s 2016 plane ride that resulted in Jolie filing for divorce.

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Lia Martin issued the ruling last Monday, after Jolie’s lawyers claimed that the documents would prove her claims Pitt tried to make her sign an NDA.

She claims that the gag order would have prevented her from speaking out about the alleged abuse, amid a verbal agreement she would sell her half of the winery to Pitt.

Jolie’s lawyers claim that the documents will prove ‘communications concerning abuse, lies to authorities, and years of cover up’ on Pitt’s part.

Pitt’s legal team sought for the motion to be denied, claiming the requests were ‘wide-ranging and intrusive’.

The actors’ lawyers also branded the filing as a ‘sensationalist fishing expedition’, with sources calling the latest ruling ‘irrelevant’, as the actor has provided ‘so much information already’.

Paul Murphy, a lawyer for Jolie, branded the documents as ‘crucial evidence’ that Pitt has ‘fought for years to hide.’

In a statement he said: ‘His actions harmed Angelina and their children and are central to this case.

‘But I want to again emphasize that Angelina never wanted any of this. She never pressed charges, she left all their properties, and she is the one who tried to sell him the business in the first place.

‘To this day, Mr. Pitt has never been held accountable for his actions and has at all times controlled Miraval and the winery, yet he still demands more. She wants this to end, the children want this to end, and Mr. Pitt should focus on healing their family, not pursuing lawsuits.’

It comes after Pitt himself scored a major legal victory, with Judge Martin throwing out Jolie’s attempt to dismiss the lawsuit.

‘It’s already been ugly but it’s going to get even uglier as Angie will insist on retaliating against Brad and trying to settle old more personal scores,’ an insider told DailyMail.com.

‘And it’s going to get costlier too – with their legal wrangling already costing both sides millions.’

Court filings suggest that the judge has found a basis in Pitt’s claims that their original verbal agreement was binding, and Jolie may have violated them when she sold her shares to Russian businessman Yuri Shefler and his Stoli Group in 2021.

Pitt’s lawyers say that Jolie violated their deal to not sell their stakes in Miraval without both parties’ permission.

With the dismissal of the three filings, the former A-List couple – who wed at the Provence, Southern France estate in 2014 and split in 2016 – are set to face off in court at the trial next year.

Pitt filed the $67million lawsuit against Jolie in 2022, less than a year after the shares were sold.

Jolie faces potential damages claims if she does not undo the deal she made with Yuri Shefler regarding the sale of her Miraval stake.

Her frustration over Pitt being awarded joint custody of their children in 2021, suggests the dispute has become highly personal for the pair, going beyond the original business matter.

Jolie has also been accused of trying to drive a wedge between her estranged husband and their six kids in the aftermath of their split.

Pitt’s team claims she believes her deal with Shefler was ‘justified’ due to the NDA her ex-husband asked her to sign.

She was dealt another blow earlier this year after the court ruled, she must produce every NDA that she signed with a third-party over an eight-year period from 2014 – the year they married – to 2022.

NDAs have become a key battleground in the dispute over Chateau Miraval after Jolie claims she backed out of their agreement because Pitt asked her to sign one as part of their business deal.

She claims that it was an ‘unconscionable’ attempt by her ex-partner to ‘control her’ after their split in April 2019, with his lawyers asking LA Superior Court to unwind the sale because of their agreement to not sell to a third party.

But Pitts attorneys have argued that Jolie’s NDA objection was really just a cover story which she cooked-up to ‘rationalize’ her betrayal of Pitt by deciding to sell her stake behind his back.

The Fight Club star’s attorneys also claim that Jolie herself ‘weaponized’ NDAs, and asked for Pitt to sign a broader NDA just six months later as part of their divorce settlement talks.

Pitt’s legal team asked in previous filings that she come clean about NDAs she entered into with third parties including staff.

Pitt has landed several legal victories in the battle for the winery including a key judgement in Luxembourg which handed him back control of the award-winning vineyard pending further hearings.

In March, LA Superior Court rejected the allegations that his suit was ‘frivolous, malicious, and part of a problematic pattern.’