Simon Cowell calls in Matrix silk against Britain's Got Talent claimant

Readers' comments (15)

• Anonymous | 23-Jul-2010 3:15 pm

  Would have loved to see the look on Mr Scowells face when he heard that news! ha!

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Piers Morgan | 23-Jul-2010 3:33 pm

  I'm surprised Cowell & Co have wasted money hiring legal representatives to "defend" this total non-case. Still, at least this displays the need for all wannabe pop stars on these shows to sign a contact confirming that "in the event the judges consider my performance to be utter shite, I will not attempt to gain further publicity by suing them".

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Anonymous | 23-Jul-2010 3:43 pm

  What a waste of time and money; not that Simon will go hungry after forking out for the defence.
  Someone needs to put their arm round this woman and gently tell her it's time to go home. How ever did this get so far?

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• City Gent | 23-Jul-2010 4:43 pm

  I suspect she has been mis-diagnosed with the fibromyalgia, and that what she's actually suffering from is mad cow disease.

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Anonymous | 23-Jul-2010 4:44 pm

  How did it get this far?
  
  For the same reason that I've been asked to insure a case against the Forestry Commission for failing an alleged duty of care to inspect every tree - one fell on the sols client, and also for a bin man being distressed at a dead animal in a bin.
  
  Too many lawyers, not enough work...

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Alex | 23-Jul-2010 5:12 pm

  This is good news! This is very good news!!!!

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Anonymous | 23-Jul-2010 7:00 pm

  This lady suffers from fibromyalgia? Since when did lawyers become doctors? If that was the case, they'd be defending themselves for medical malpractice...
  
  As stupid as this case turns out to be, I'm sure Cowell will pay exuberant fees and the lawyers will add this case to their list of 'High Profile Clientele'. How pathetic.
  
  Should the lawyers stand in front of Simon Cowell and perform? Oh, I forgot, they do that for their day job.

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Legally Blonde | 23-Jul-2010 9:28 pm

  If she loses, which I suspect she will on these facts, she'll be paying Cowells' legal fess and his very expensive QC Bill.

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• suzanne young | 23-Jul-2010 10:41 pm

  Stupid case, i am an ex choreographer, worked for over 25 years in the stage/dance industry. Then became disabled due to a car crash. Should i roll up with my walking stick or wheel chair and blame simon because i cannot teach or perform on a stage anymore. How stupid is this person, it is not their disability - it is the fact that they simply cannot sing. As a disabled person i loathe people using it as an excuse for ignorance or stupidity. I lost the use of my legs not the use of my brain. Disabled people can be just as judgemental or play victim when it suits. Others and there are many of us who are disabled, do not use our disability for sympathy or redress to gain financial reward for nothing!! Woman, stop giving people with disability problems a bad name. Sorry Simon, u do meet some wacko's dont you!

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Anonymous | 24-Jul-2010 5:23 pm

  In the words of Ricky Tomlinson appearing as Jim in the Royle Family:
  
  Fibromyalgia? "My arse".
  
  Half of those suffering according to wikipedia are making it up.

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• ShaunUK | 27-Jul-2010 6:00 pm

  Thus far, the comments seem turn on the subjective emotive response of 'this is a stupid case' but give insufficient substantive objective reasoning for making that claim.
  
  The claimant, Emma Amelia Pearl Czikai, is not blaming the respondants (Syco) for her losing, in the show 'Britain’s Got Talent', due to her being disabled, but rather, this case turns on a disability discrimination claim. The essence of this claim is that programme did not provide adequate arrangements as she suffers fibromyalgia. Fibromyalgia is a medical condition resulting in chronic muscle and connective tissue pain and allodynia, a heightened and painful response to pressure, often referred to as FM or FMS, for which medical evidence can be made available, should the claimant actually suffer FM/FMS. Based on this evidence being presented. the courts will need to decide whether there is an actual case for disability discrimination or not.
  
  It may well be that there is no case, and it may well be that the claimant's lawyers have misadvised her in this case, however, if the company did think that there was simply no hope at all, it is doubtful that they would proceed, unless it is for self-glorification. If it is for self-glorification, then it is a rather long fall, should they fail to win this case. It is worth noting that the claimant did bring a complaint before OFCOM and it was rejected, but the grounds of that complaint do not appear here, nor do the reasons for its rejection.
  
  To continue with the idea of the claimant having no case or that it is allegedly stupid is a rather brash unsupported comment rooted in subjective emotive responses, rather than based on the facts of the case, of which there is insufficient to decide either way.

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Anonymous | 29-Jul-2010 12:02 pm

  ShaunUK - actually I think you're missing a lot of her claim. Yes, she is claiming that they did not adequately provide for her on the basis of her fibromyalgia but is claiming for injury to her feelings etc (i.e. being humiliated on national TV) and for loss of earnings (i.e. because she didn't get through). She is not just claiming that the audition process is indirectly discriminatory against those with conditions akin to her own but that she is in fact so good that she lost on £1.25m based on this. Her claim is far more about the eventual outcome of not being put through and how she looked on TV than any discomfort or pain experienced at the time. I find it hard to believe her motivations are to fight for the disabled potential auditionees – it seems more plausible she is embarrassed and still deluded about her own talent.

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Julie | 29-Jul-2010 2:14 pm

  I know nothing of this case other than what's written here and while I agree the damages she's seeking are a bit over the top, I think the majority of you are callous toads. Anyone who suffers from a pain disorder of any kind is always accused of being a moaner, liar or malingering. Pain is subjective, but this does not mean it doesn't exist. The bottom line always is that people who have not experienced the condition (or just bad pain generally) have no idea what it is like to live with pain on a daily basis. I know I couldn't comprehend what a migraine was really like until I had one myself. If she is lying or unduly inflating her claim, the judge won't stand for it. Given that it's incredibly difficult to pursue any real sort of disability discrimination in the UK she has an uphill battle in any event.

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Anonymous | 29-Jul-2010 3:53 pm

  Julie - before calling everyone "callous toads" you might want to youtube her performance and see that she is in fact an appalling singer. I don't think pain has anything to do with it. She had a chance to repeat her performance on Britain's got more Talent when she herself says she was not suffering and was as apalling. People are unsympathetic because she appears to be litigious and with no discernable singing ability not because they are "callous toads" and don't care about the fact she has fibromyalgia. Get off your high horse.

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• sebastiannook | 1-Aug-2010 11:34 pm

  toomany lawyers and not enough work . health and safety gone mad. how about this . large charity puts glass objects in bin because they are not worth anything thief cuts hand whilst rooting in bin and sues charity how low can you go

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment