TMZ

Our TV Shows

Got a Tip?

Call TMZ at (888) 847-9869 or Click Here

Simon Cowell

Lauren's Divorce Settlement

Simon, Stay Away From Her Son ... OR ELSE!

11/14/2013 10:40 AM PST BY TMZ STAFF
EXCLUSIVE

1114-silverman-cowell-01
Simon Cowell'
s baby mama, Lauren Silverman, signed a divorce settlement agreement which has a shocking penalty -- if Simon goes near her 7-year-old son, she has to pay her ex a $50,000 PENALTY!

TMZ is privy to the unbelievable settlement agreement, which also provides that if Lauren violates the Simon stay-away clause 3 times, she loses all contact with her son, Adam, until a court deals with the violations.

The Simon stay-away clause only lasts until January, 2015.   So presumably the kid can be around Simon in a year ... if he's still part of Lauren's life.

But the plot thickens.  The settlement agreement also provides Andrew Silverman, Lauren's ex, cannot trash Simon to Adam and has a legal obligation to make sure no one else around him talks smack.

And there's a clause in the settlement that provides Lauren and Andrew both agree to prevent Adam from calling anyone other than them "mother" or "father."  Translation:  Simon is not your daddy.

Andrew agrees to pay Lauren $3k a month in child support ... a modest amount and it goes to what TMZ has been reporting ... that Simon will become the cash cow.

Finally, Lauren and Andrew agreed to change the cause of divorce from adultery to "broken down irretrievably."

1114_lauren_simon_cowell_footer

143 COMMENTS

No Avatar

| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | Most Recent | Next 15 Comments
1.

Observer    

LOTS of RULES Simon.....
-
You sure you want to buy that cow?
You already got the tainted milk, so??

321 days ago
2.

Wow ...    

What a bizarre settlement.

321 days ago
3.

AreUCrazy    

So another prime example of so called 'Adults', who cant get along, using a child as a pawn and the courts who go along with it.

321 days ago
4.

KicksandGiggles    

No danger of Simon breaking that rule. He will have to be forced to be around his own kid. Poor kid has to be a item in this mess because his skanky momma could not clamp her legs closed while she was married to his daddy.

321 days ago
5.

Googie    

Simon is the winner in this settlement. He won't have to deal with a 7 yr old hanging around. Now lets see how Simon does around a baby? How long before he becomes an absentee father so he can keep womanizing?

321 days ago
6.

dorothy    

Her ex should have put a clause in there that stated her child couldn't be around her! It was despicable and very troubling that a mother would parade around, pregnant, while still married to her child's father. I personally hope she breaks the 3X rule. She shouldn't be around a children, she has no morals.

321 days ago
7.

BlackStallion    

The bitch doesn't even deserve any settlement because she's the one who cheated and got knocked up. Simon can afford her and their baby. Why does she deserve any money? She should get a job. She is also never with her son Adam anyway. That poor kid will be picked on for who knows how long thanks to those to whores. I hope Andrew meets a nice woman who will raise Adam with true values because Lauren is all about the money and whoring herself out.

321 days ago
8.

hartz    

This won't be an issue for very long. I don't see Simon still being with Lauren once the baby is born. I wouldn't be surprised if a year from now (or sooner) to see a big brawl over child support between Simon and Lauren.

321 days ago
9.

Pers    

Good. Simon's a slut. His baby momma's a slut. Leave the kid out of it.

321 days ago
10.

Patti    

this makes me NEVER want to get married.....WTF is wrong with people.....who wants to deal with this crap

321 days ago
11.

Ozzie X    

I don't blame the chap one bit. Simon is creepy and slimey.

321 days ago
12.

Livvie    

She had a new cash cow, complete with man b.o.o.b.s.

321 days ago
13.

lisa705    

what a ridiculous clause. has simon ever been accused of anything having to do with children?

321 days ago
14.

Michaela    

I can't imagine that that is legal. How can he have requirements like this, when that is not supported by law?

A contract with clauses that go against the law is not enforceable.

321 days ago
15.

Me    

Keep away from the child? I wish I would have thought of that.

321 days ago
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | Most Recent | Next 15 Comments

Around The Web