Russell Brand not seeking Katy Perry's money in divorce: Report

By: Jessica Derschowitz
Topics: Celebrity

Russell Brand and Katy Perry attend the European Premiere of "Arthur" on April 19, 2011, in London.

(Credit: Getty)

(CBS) Russell Brand is entitled to a large sum of money from Katy Perry in the couple's divorce, but he's reportedly not asking for any of it.

According to TMZ, the British actor-comedian isn't seeking any money from his estranged wife, despite being able to walk away with tens of millions of dollars.

Pictures: Katy Perry and Russell Brand

"This divorce is as amicable as it gets," a source told the website.

Brand and Perry married in October 2010, and he filed for divorce in December 2011. A source told People the couple did not sign a prenuptial agreement, meaning Brand could lay claim to half of what the singer earned while they were married.

Forbes estimates that Perry earned $44 million between May 2010 and May 2011.

TMZ reports that the couple's divorce will be made official on June 30, after a mandatory six-month waiting period.

19 Photos

Katy Perry & Russell Brand

View the Full Gallery »

7 Comments +

Add a Comment


by Transatlantique February 8, 2012 7:21 PM EST: He should have taken it. She will simply make up for it on her next CD, and so on. Most women would have taken his money if it had been the other way around. Fair is fair, and until women change their materialistic gold digging ways, then men should have the same opportunities.; Reply to this comment

by debbie1120 February 8, 2012 5:51 PM EST

He's not asking for money cause he probably can't. It may state something in the prenup.

Reply to this comment


by you_MAY_be_right February 8, 2012 6:53 PM EST: Did you read the artiloe?

"[T]he couple did not sign a prenuptial agreement..."


by michaelz06 February 8, 2012 7:04 PM EST: You obviously didn't read the article.

by dkb218 February 8, 2012 3:40 PM EST

This is what a MAN does. Big Kudos Mr. Brand.

Reply to this comment


by Bojax39 February 8, 2012 4:56 PM EST: But, does a MAN marry a woman for 14 months then dump her? Marries her in October of 2010, files for divorce in December of 2011. Like a child who gets tired of a new toy and tosses it aside when the newness wears thin. Nothing manly about that....


by Transatlantique February 8, 2012 7:14 PM EST: I suppose if he had taken his entitled half under the law, you would not consider him a "MAN?" Women have been doing this to men for a long time, and its OUR turn now. To hell with the concept of "MAN." If there is no prenup, its a 50/50 split. If he had most of the money, she probably would have wanted half.