The Jolie-Pitt legal dispute over a $164 million French estate.

Here is the reformatted text:

According to yesterday's court documents

Angelina Jolie allegedly used underhanded tactics in an attempt to deprive her ex-husband Brad Pitt of profitable real estate, including a luxurious estate in France that they co-owned. Documents filed on Tuesday in Luxembourg indicate that Jolie is accused of trying to sell her 50 percent share in the $164 million Château Miraval estate in Correns, France, without giving Pitt the first right of refusal. This 1,000-acre estate held special significance for the couple, as it was where they secretly married in 2014 in the presence of only six of their children. Allegations of petty maneuvering have surfaced amid the couple's ongoing custody dispute, as their lawyers returned to court on Monday.

As can be seen from the lawsuit

According to journalists, Pitt, 57, and Jolie, 46, owned shares in Château Miraval through separate limited liability companies (LLCs). According to documents, Miraval is owned by the company Kimikum, in which Pitt initially held a 60 percent stake through his company Mondo Bongo, while Jolie owned 40 percent through her company Nouvell. Three years before their separation in 2016, Pitt transferred 10 percent of the estate from Mondo Bongo to Nouvell, making them equal shareholders. Sources reported that as part of the agreement, the former couple also agreed to seek each other's permission if they wanted to sell their shares. However, the lawsuit claims that Jolie attempted to sell her shares discreetly, without giving Pitt the right of first refusal. "He did everything, and she did nothing," a source said. According to the lawsuit, the 10 percent transfer should be deemed invalid, as the shares were "sold" for just 1 euro, rather than a "serious" amount as required by Luxembourg law. They are now valued at over €140 million (about $164 million).

"It is worth noting that over the past four years, Nouvell [Jolie's company] has not acted in the interests of Kimikum."

“Systematically delaying the approval of annual reports and the extension of the manager's contract,” the lawsuit states.

“We understand that in reality, Nuvell and her shareholder [Jolie] are trying to sell their stake in Château Miraval SA in a way that circumvents Mondo Bongo's right of first refusal (as provided in the Kimikuma articles), profiting from Mondo Bongo's investments, in which Nuvell did not participate.” A source said: “This is yet another example of how Angelina is trying to bypass the rules and evade her obligations.”

Jolie filed for divorce in August 2016.

citing "irreconcilable differences" and requested primary custody of five of their six children: Pax, 17, Zahara, 16, Shiloh, 15, and twins Vivienne and Knox, 13. Court documents indicate that Jolie did not seek Pitt's permission before attempting to sell her shares in Château Miraval. As we reported in June, Pitt was awarded joint custody—a decision that Jolie promised to contest. The actress stated that three of the children wanted to testify against Pitt, but they were prohibited from doing so by Judge John Ouderkirk, the private judge that Pitt and Jolie initially agreed upon to maintain the confidentiality of their case details. However, just a month later, Jolie won when her lawyers convinced a California appellate court to disqualify Ouderkirk on the grounds that Pitt's lawyers did not disclose his previous cases with the Oscar-winning attorney. Pitt's lawyers requested permission for the case to be reviewed by the California Supreme Court, and Jolie filed her response on Monday. Pitt's attorney, Theodore J. Boutrous Jr., told us: "The lower court's decision will reward the losing parties in the child custody case and endorse their manipulative tactics, allowing them to wait and see the possible direction of the case before filing a motion to disqualify the judge. A ruling on the disqualification motion, which they find offensive, will cause irreparable harm to both the children and the families involved in this case, as well as to other families in other cases, excessively prolonging the resolution of these disputes in an already overloaded California court system. Allowing such cunning legal tactics will result in parents losing invaluable time with their children due to the disqualification of judges on trivial grounds in the middle of their cases." Jolie's representatives declined to comment.