The estranged wife of Salim Mehajer has been bombarded with more than 400 emails from the controversial property developer since they separated and feels as if she's being stalked, a court has heard.
Some emails have been doctored to look as if they've been sent by Aysha Mehajer, with one depicting a fictional conversation in which she tells her husband she wants to reconcile, according to a statement tendered in the Sutherland Local Court.
"These emails make me feel on edge and like I'm being stalked," Ms Mehajer, a former Wollongong beautician, said in the July statement.
"I'm looking over my shoulder constantly and do not know what he is capable of."
The former couple didn't appear in court on Wednesday when magistrate Jaye Carney issued an interim apprehended violence order against Mehajer following a police application on his estranged wife's behalf.
His solicitor, Matthew Ward, opposed the interim AVO, arguing the allegations about doctored emails didn't make any sense.
Mr Ward said Mehajer's emails weren't threatening, had been sent over a period of at least a year and the couple hadn't seen each other in person for 13 months.
But police prosecutor Tamsin Beehag said Ms Mehajer, who is also known by her maiden name Learmonth, felt the "harassing emails" were increasing and was worried the situation would escalate.
"She's receiving emails that appear to have been written by her but aren't," Ms Beehag said.
"She doesn't know what more emails could have been sent around which appear to have been written by her but which she says have not been written by her."
The prosecutor said Ms Mehajer didn't reply to the emails and changed her phone number in an attempt to "avoid any contact whatsoever" but her husband still found her details.
"She's going to extreme lengths to stop the contact, given the phone number is in a different name," she said.
The magistrate noted Mehajer had been denied procedural fairness by not being able to cross-examine his wife who she said had a good reason for not being in court on Wednesday.
However, Ms Carney found the matter required urgent consideration and considered it appropriate to make an interim order, before a hearing to consider a final AVO.
The matter is next scheduled to be in court on October 4 when a hearing date will be fixed.