South Australian star’s bitter family feud as warring parents battle ‘high conflict’ divorce blighted with police and disputed domestic violence; drugs allegations

A South Australian celebrity is embroiled in one of the nation’s most bitter divorce battles, with shocking disputed claims and allegations fueling the turmoil.

The pair, who experienced long-term relationship “dysfunction”, must follow strict, interim custody orders. Picture: iStock/ posed by models

A South Australian celebrity is embroiled in one of the country’s most bitter divorces that is set to cost more than $1m amid police intervention, domestic violence claims and drug abuse allegations.

The former couple, who cannot be identified for legal reasons, are locked in “extra-ordinarily vitriolic” Family Court litigation after their volatile marriage failed years ago.

But as the warring, “high- functioning” pair fight a multimillion-dollar property and custody battle, three different judges have laid bare their “intense” and “frequent” conflict.

The feud, which a judge described as among the most bitter the court had witnessed, risks costing them almost $1.3m – or a quarter of their assets. Federal law keeps their identities secret and bans personal details being published that could identify them, such as their respective occupations.

A judge described the litigation as among the most bitter the Family Court had ever witnessed. Picture: iStock/posed by models

Court documents allege police involvement along with other disputed claims of domestic violence, self-harm threats, drug use and money disappearing.

The husband, who also earns a “significant salary”, alleges his wife threatened to “destroy him in court”.

A court-ordered hair drug test found only oxycodone traces for his medical pain.

The pair deny all claims.

Ruling on various pre-trial disputes on custody, handovers, communication, schooling and other visits, judges warned of the long-term damage from a “highly adversarial” row.

“It is an unfortunate reflection on the parties’ lack of insight that they are not able to regulate their behaviour so as to minimise the … conflict,” the trial judge ruled.

Other family members pleaded for the parents, who hired some of the country’s top legal minds, to “consider the long-term financial implication” on the “bank of mum and dad”.

After they suggested mediation, the pair – who own more than $4m of property in affluent suburbs and have $750,000 superannuation but suffer “extreme level of acrimony and suspicion” – failed to agree on a mediator.

“The parties appear intent on pursuing the litigation even though it would not be beyond their ability, given the (legal) assistance … to resolve all outstanding issues,” the trial judge said.

An earlier judge criticised the “extraordinarily vitriolic litigation, even by the standards of comparable cases” that had been “conducted in the most adversarial way possible”.

“It has consumed an amount of money, which I dare to opine a fair-minded, reasonably inform­ed member of the public might regard as obscene,” he said.

The judge was unable to determine “any clear protagonist”, but the parties “appear locked in a mutually destructive cycle of recrimination”.

The court, which has published several pre-trial judgments using pseudonyms, contrasted their parenting.

The pair, who experienced long-term relationship “dysfunction”, must follow strict, interim custody orders.

An expert told the court: “The ongoing level of conflict … was unacceptable and distracting the parents from their proper role in working together to parent … appropriately.”

The wife, papers assert, was “highly critical of the husband on a number of bases” and blamed him “no matter what he does”.

She alleged he was a bad parent who used illicit substances, was an alcoholic, behaved in a coercive and controlling manner and had poorly diagnosed but “significant” mental health issues.

A judge found her “objective evidence lacking”.

The husband, who strongly denied all her allegations, asserted she wanted to control his life and custody “to satisfy her own emotional needs”.

He reported to his psychiatrist “his mood had improved since his separation”.

“Essentially, he portrayed the wife as being herself an emotionally labile person, with a hot temper, who was intent on controlling him,” the judge said.

Neither side would comment outside court on Saturday night.

Originally published as South Australian star’s bitter family feud as warring parents battle ‘high conflict’ divorce blighted with police and disputed domestic violence; drugs allegations