A High Court judge has ruled that a businessman hired a HR company which he used to hound his critically ill wife with incessant communication requests. The lady was further subjected to participate in a disciplinary process related to their joint business, according to the orders issued by Mr Justice Max Barrett during their divorce proceedings.
Despite her ill health and multiple difficult surgeries, the husband demanded that she provide a detailed account of her medical condition to the company’s HR department, which is located abroad. The judge said that the HR firm “pestered” the woman, often on a daily basis, reassessed her salary and subsequently determined that she was getting paid too much. Consequently, she was let go and has since filed an unjust dismissal claim.
As the man was accusing his soon-to-be ex-wife of violating HR policies, he was simultaneously dipping into the company’s funds for exorbitant personal pleasure expenses and filing incorrect accounts with the Companies Registration Office.
Justice Barrett granted a divorce decree at the woman’s request in his initial ruling published more than a year ago, which also detailed custody agreements for their children, asset division, and the amount of alimony to be paid by the man. He subsequently refused the man’s plea for altering the spousal maintenance amount in his second verdict.
The judge pointed out that the man and his brother were the company’s directors, while the woman was not. The brother is currently the sole director. The man had declared himself bankrupt in his native country and had been using the company’s funds as his private wallet, using large untaxed sum of money for his own entertainment, according to the judge.
The judge, in his most recent verdict, expressed suspicion that the man might be concealing his corporate misdeeds under the guise of this private family law case, thereby interfering with the course of justice. An expert accountant, brought in by the woman, revealed that the average monthly spending anomaly over a four-month period was nearly €16,000.
The man was suspected of manipulating both the family law system in Ireland and the insolvency procedures in his homeland. This suspicion stemmed from the man providing evidently false fiscal details to the High Court during this family dispute, as well as presenting differing financial figures to a foreign insolvency service, according to the presiding judge.
The judge noted that the regulatory responsibilities of corporate and tax misbehavior lay primarily with the man’s home country. However, the woman’s legal team contended that his family law judgments should be disclosed, albeit in a redacted form to protect individual identities, for the scrutiny of the overseas insolvency service. The woman was in favour of this desired disclosure for the benefit of herself and her offspring.
The judge warned that there was a potential risk that a misinformed decision made by an international insolvency service could cause permanent harm to the man’s spouse and children.
Mr Justice Barrett firmly believed that, if the man is ultimately declared bankrupt in his own country, he will apply to the Irish court for a permanent reduction in maintenance. The judge conceded to the submission of his legal decisions to multiple organisations.
Also, people can keep themselves updated with current political analysis through Inside Politics Podcast. Also, there’s an option to sign up for instant alerts to receive the latest news, analysis and comments directly to your mobile device. Lastly, check out The Irish Times on WhatsApp for further updates.