LifestylePREMIUM

Black Coffee floors Maserati in R7m court victory

High court orders luxury carmaker to pay DJ’s company after failed car deal

Black Coffee has scored a R7m victory against Maserati SA after the Johannesburg high court ordered the dealership to pay his company. Picture: (Instagram)

Story audio is generated using AI

Grammy Award-winning musician Black Coffee has scored a major victory in his legal battle with Maserati South Africa, with the Johannesburg high court ordering the luxury car manufacturer to pay his company R7m over a disputed vehicle deal.

The order, handed down by acting judge Sanet van Aswegen, granted summary judgment in favour of Black Coffee’s company Soulistic Music.

While the order does not set out detailed reasons for the court’s decision, Maserati was also ordered to pay interest calculated at 10.5% a year from August 22 2025, until the amount is paid in full.

The order provides a decisive victory for the DJ and record producer, whose real name is Nkosinathi Maphumulo, in his fight with the luxury car manufacturer.

Maphumulo argued that the dealership had failed to meet the July 2025 delivery deadline agreed for a new Maserati MC20 Cielo and wanted the deal cancelled and his R7m down payment refunded. But Maserati denied agreeing to the deadline and claimed Maphumulo had never confirmed the customised specifications he wanted.

In his court papers, Maphumulo said he initially bought an MC20 Coupe from Maserati in 2022 for R7m. About two years later, he decided to buy an MC20 Cielo from the same dealership for R9m.

A Maserati MC20 Fuoriserie. Picture: Maserati (Maserati)

He claimed that, as part of the quote, Maserati offered him R7m as a trade-in for his old vehicle and that a “partly written, partly oral” purchase agreement was concluded. Maphumulo would pay the R2m balance on delivery of the new car.

He listed 18 specifications for the vehicle, including a Sonus Faber high-premium sound system with 12 speakers, Maserati Blu Infinito colour, specific wheels with a “glossy black diamond cut”, and full leather and Alcantara interiors with stitching and a chevron design.

But he said that on June 3 the dealership told him the car would only be sent for production in August, with no estimated delivery date. He said this constituted a breach of the agreement and told the dealership to cancel the deal and repay the trade-in amount.

The following day he received an e-mail saying: “We are pleased to announce that we have secured a production slot for your Fuoriserie order. Since you’re a globally recognised figure, the factory has made a special exception for us. Your Fuoriserie order will be going into production in August, we will be able to confirm further details closer to the time.”

But Maphumulo was not convinced and followed up a month later about the repayment. “Despite the demand, to date [Maserati] has failed/neglected/refused to make payment.”

In its plea, Maserati denied that the agreed delivery date was July 2025, adding that the production of a customised vehicle, such as the Cielo, takes a minimum of nine months from the date of confirmation of the specifications

In its plea, Maserati denied that the agreed delivery date was July 2025, adding that the production of a customised vehicle, such as the Cielo, takes a minimum of nine months from the date of confirmation of the specifications.

It said Maphumulo had selected custom colours for the exterior, interior, interior trimmings, seat belts and brake calipers that were not included in the quotation, and that he was “required to confirm these further customisations, following which these specifications would need to be approved by Maserati SA’s head office and an estimated date for delivery obtained (as each car is custom-made)”. ”.

The company therefore argued that it was not in breach of any agreement. It also argued that without the purchase of the new vehicle, the trade-in value would not have been R7m.

However, the order was decisive, with the dealership also ordered to pay the legal costs of the proceedings.

Meanwhile, Maphumulo remains locked in a separate legal battle with social media commentator Nota Baloyi. Maphumulo is claiming defamation after Baloyi made allegations on a podcast about the DJ’s financial affairs during his divorce from television personality Enhle Mbali Mlotshwa.

He has launched contempt proceedings against Baloyi, seeking to have him jailed for allegedly failing to comply with a court order relating to the dispute.

Baloyi has opposed Maphumulo’s application and, in turn, alleges that the musician harassed his mother in an attempt to put pressure on him. Baloyi has described the alleged conduct as intimidating and is seeking R25,000 in damages for the distress allegedly suffered by his mother.

Maphumulo, however, has accused Baloyi of a ”total and unapologetic disregard for the law and authority of this court”.



Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.

Comment icon