Secrecy over high-profile case

Under the court order, it cannot be revealed which political party the man belongs to. Photo / Brett Phibbs

The wife of a high-profile political figure facing a protection order has hired a bodyguard to live in the couple's $3m mansion, according to those close to the case.

The man was accused in the Family Court of grabbing his wife around the neck, trying to kick in the door of their home and shouting abuse at her.

A court order prevents the publication of anything that would reveal the couple's identities - including their names, occupations, ages, and qualifications. Under the court order, it cannot even be revealed which political party the man belongs to.

The woman wanted a protection order against her estranged husband, while he wanted an "occupation order" against her which would force her from the house.

The Herald on Sunday has learned the case came after the woman travelled abroad to nurse her father. A close friend of the woman said she returned to find her husband was seeing another woman - a politician - and that other people were living in her house.

The couple attempted counselling but separated a short time later.

One source connected to the case said police had been called to the property when the man tried to enter the house.

The source said the woman had suffered increasing stress after tyres on her Porsche were slashed and she believed she was being spied on by surveillance cameras.

The woman hired bodyguards and one has moved into the home. The Herald on Sunday can't reveal the bodyguard's identity because it might expose the couple involved. However, the man employed as a bodyguard has a conviction for failing to provide the necessaries of life, leading to the death of a child.

The woman's lawyer, Antonia Fisher, said her client was "frightened to the point that she felt she couldn't breathe", according to a Fairfax Media report this week.

It was also claimed the man had tried to kick down the woman's door - something Fisher said "he seemed to see nothing wrong" about.

A witness testifying by video link from overseas said she had heard the man shouting obscenities at the woman. She told the man it was "abusive and really unacceptable".

The man's lawyer, Anthony Grant, said his client wanted the right to get back into his house.

It was "not surprising" there was shouting and screaming between the couple - and he denied claims the man had grabbed the woman around the neck. Instead, he had touched her on the shoulder and the neck, said Grant.

Four months ago the case would have been heard under secrecy, but the Family Courts Matters Act, which came into effect in May, opened up the court to increased media access and public scrutiny.

Bell Gully media law expert Tania Goatley said the changes had helped bolster transparency.

But judges would give name suppression to protect victims of alleged violence and other vulnerable people, she said.

Despite the suppression order, there is the prospect of politicians using details of the case to embarrass opponents in Parliament this week.

Judge Sarah Fleming has reserved her decision.