The dispute between Joanna Opozda and the family of Antek Królikowski continues.
As reported by the portal” Pomponik “, the media the war between Joanna Opozda and the Kr & oacute; likowski family continues. Małgorzata Ostrowska-Kr & oacute; likowska denies the accusations of the wife of her eldest son that Antek is evading paying alimony on Vincent.
Unexpected wedding and unexpected breakup
Last summer, Joanna Opozda and Antek Kr & oacute; likowski took a marriage vow. Many fans of the actor hoped that their idol would finally settle down and create a happy family together with their chosen one. Unfortunately, the lack of stability in Antek's feelings made itself felt quite quickly. Even before the birth of his son, he betrayed Opozdha with their common neighbor.
Recently, the actress admitted that she was forced to start a case in court in connection with the fact that Antek Kr & oacute; likowski did not pay alimony for their son. “Antek did not pay alimony, so I applied to the court to secure the family's needs. The court awarded alimony, which Antek still does not pay, so the bailiff is currently dealing with the case” – wrote the actress.
Małgorzata Ostrowska-Kr & oacute; likowska, who openly denied the words of Joanna Opozda on the Internet, reacted immediately.
Małgorzata Ostrowska-Kr & oacute ; likowski caused a storm on the network
One of the internauts asked the mother of Antek Kr & oacute; likowski about whether it is not humanly possible to apply for a son, which is blamed for paying alimony for a son. Małgorzata Ostrowska-Kr & oacute; likowska ironically called her “lucky”, who has better information than she.
Some internet users openly called the behavior of the Kr & oacute; likers a law, accusing them of destroying Vincent's baptism with an invitation to the ceremony of Joanna's father, with which she is not in touch. Also, there was an argument about the lack of child support from Antek and not taking care of the child.
Wife of Paweł Kr & oacute likowski vehemently denied having ever participated in any acts. She also stated that Antek is not evading the obligation to pay alimony, because these have not yet been awarded by the court.
What do you think about the whole case?