exclusive
The ex-wife of a blue-collar company boss whose staff protested in extraordinary scenes outside the Family Court in Sydney claims her estranged husband rounded up the boys to intimidate her.
Further, the woman involved in the bitter divorce split insists she’s been paying the bills while her Fendi-wearing ex has been cashing in on the high life.
The ex-wife of the business boss did not attend the Family Court on Monday after it was warned it was the scene of a large gathering of his staff in hi-vis gear ‘being there to intimidate him’.
“What happened yesterday was an act of intimidation and harassment,” the woman’s court supporter told Daily Mail Australia, adding that they stayed away from the scheduled hearing for fear of being caught by the company’s men.
The ex-wife of the blue-collar boss (pictured, with his second wife) whose staff protested outside the Family Court on Monday said her ex-husband had hissed at the boys to ‘harass and intimidate’ her.
The court heard on Monday that Family Court proceedings threatened the business with possible liquidation and the men’s jobs, with the husband’s lawyer blaming the ‘wife’.
But the wife’s support representative said it “must be made clear that the husband should be fully responsible for his staff and his business” and that the husband – who the court heard had borrowed $1.7m – was spending too much.
He recently got married (to his second wife) in a lavish wedding with no expense spared.
“I find it funny how he can fathom that (someone) in such financial straits would be dressed head to toe in Fendi.
The friend claimed the wife ‘has been responsible for paying their son’s school fees while the husband has been living the high life … and carrying on like there’s no problem at all’.
She ‘never wanted the business involved’ and ‘the man needs to take responsibility for his actions and close this chapter once and for all.’
It’s unclear when the marriage began, but court records reveal the woman obtained a domestic violence order against her ex-husband in 2014.
The clash between the two sides reached its bitter climax with dozens of staff thronged outside the court entrance in the city’s CBD as the court hearing was about to begin.
The entire staff of a company gathered outside the Family Court on Monday to support their boss’ bitter battle with his ex-wife.
Bystanders watched curiously as the men flashed their company’s logo in a show of force on the footpath near the extremely private and security-conscious court complex.
Denying the group was staging a protest, one of the men told Daily Mail Australia: “We don’t have signs or banners, we’re just here to show support for the boss.”
At a lunchtime hearing before a Family Court judge, the husband’s lawyer claimed the company boss was “trying to keep the business going, keep the employees working” and blamed the “wife” for the company being threatened with liquidation.
Staff in hi-vis jackets clustered around the entrance to the privacy and security-conscious Family Court of Australia on Goulburn Street
He said the woman had placed an order on one of the company’s properties “to prevent its sale … leading to the financial jeopardy of this current business”.
The court was told: ‘The husband is … the person in charge who runs the day-to-day operations.
‘The woman wants to take him out of this and put in a professional (receiver)’.
“The man has important contacts with third parties, personal relationships. Things may never be the same again.’
However, the woman’s lawyer argued there had been a decline in the business’s financial credibility, cash flow issues and an unpaid tax bill of nearly half a million dollars.
He said the woman was still waiting for information ‘something about the current financial situation of the group’.
The court heard the business had current liabilities of more than $11 million and debts of $8 million.
As the men showed their strength outside, inside, the boss’s lawyer argued he was ‘trying to keep the business going, keep the employees working’
The judge was ‘very persuaded’ by the husband’s argument and questioned his objections to the installation of a receiver.
The judge said that if the financial remedies are not pursued ‘not a receiver but a liquidator will be appointed’.
The judge said the way the financial and other documents were presented to the court was ‘simply extraordinary’.
The judge also questioned the fact that the man had borrowed $1.7 million to keep the business afloat and said managing the appointment of a receiver ‘is all in (the man’s) hands. (He) must come to terms with what he has created’.
“The man has done his best in trying to save this business, its employees and its stakeholders,” the lawyers claimed.
The case continues. None of the parties involved in this story could be identified for legal reasons.
(tagsTranslate) daily mail(s) news(s) Sydney