Tugendhat J allows Katie Price privacy case against Peter Andre to proceed
The High Court has refused to throw out misuse of private information claims brought by celebrity Katie Price against her ex-husband Peter Andre, ex-manager Claire Powell, and ex-friend Jamelah Asmar.
Mr Justice Tugendhat
Mr Justice Tugendhat ruled last month that Price could take her case to full trial despite a strike-out attempt from Admar, who had also claimed that the suit was an abuse of process.
Mark Bateman of media boutique Acherfield Partners instructed 1 Brick Court’s Aidan Eardley for Price.
He opposed arguments put forward by David Price QC, of David Price Solicitors and Advocates, that Ms Price had put so much of her own personal information into the public eye that any expectation of privacy she might have should be overridden.
Price is instructed directly to lead Korieh Duodu of the same firm for Asmar. Simons Muirhead & Burton are instructed for Powell and CAN Associates, while Lee & Thompson is instructed for Andre.
The dispute involves allegations from Ms Price that Powell, who had been manager to both Ms Price and Andre prior to the couple’s split, had conspired with her ex-husband Andre and Asmar to smear her reputation.
The central allegation concerns an affidavit Asmar wrote following an article in Now magazine with comments attributed to Price. Andre had threatened the publication with defamation proceedings and Asmar provided the affidavit in support.
According to Tugendhat J’s judgment, Powell allegedly tried to sell the affidavit to the now defunct News of the World with the knowledge of Asmar, despite it revealing information about the man Ms Price claimed had raped her. This, Ms Price claims, constituted misuse of private information.
Price contended that no story was printed and therefore no harm was done to Ms Price, furthermore that the claim was not launched until two years after the meeting between Asmar and the journalists.
Ms Price’s damages claim, he added, was based on injury to feelings, whereas she had in the past volunteered such facts of a similar nature.
Eardley, however, said Ms Price had been “tremendously hurt and upset” and that her evidence should not be dismissed summarily.
In his judgment Tugendhat J said the case was a “lamentable renewal of civil litigation” between Andre and Price and urged them to resolve the issue for their two young children.
Nevertheless, he said the case could proceed to full trial. He said Eardley’s arguments for Ms Price were to be preferred but, he continued: “A very different picture may emerge if the case does go to trial. At that point the court could with hindsight take the view that Mr Price’s submissions were well founded.”
View results 10 per page | 20 per page
Readers' comments (17)
Anonymous | 9-Jan-2013 3:17 pm
katie price lets us all know what she is doing this is just another thing to get back at pete vile woman feel so sorry for the kids good job they have a decent dad.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Kevin the gerbil | 9-Jan-2013 3:43 pm
I don't really understand why this case has been allowed to go ahead. The judgment says that 2 reporters and a lawyer had seen the document KP refers to, no damage was caused, no threat of a future revelation, no breach of contract. The only thing it did was hurt her feelings. If we all start bringing cases against friends who have hurt our feelings we will never be out of court.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Dee | 9-Jan-2013 10:19 pm
I don,t understand what Katie Price hopes to achieve, her reputation for me, was ruined by her antics after her divorce from Peter Andre.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 9-Jan-2013 10:54 pm
YAY! Finally, CAN & Andre will pay for their public smearing. I hope she wipes the floor with them...& this case has nothing to do with her mothering skills...The only stupid thing people refer to.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
rob | 10-Jan-2013 9:49 am
I am sure counsel will happily relieve Ms Price of a lot of her "hard earned" wealth.. ensuring that she can not afford to waste the courts time in the future
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 10-Jan-2013 12:07 pm
I wonder if this is connected to Andre saying on Piers Morgan and at other times that he will one day reveal something about Price? That always sounded as if he had something on her to divulge?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Jon | 10-Jan-2013 6:49 pm
So pleased Judge T made his remark regarding the children. I suspect Katie Price has been forced into this case and feel her and Andre, will both, along with the children, lose in many ways in the long term. Get rid of the 3rd Parties that appear to have set out to cause and participated in creating this situation. Make peace for your children.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
curley | 10-Jan-2013 8:24 pm
Can tried to sell an affidavit made by Andre's friend Asmar to news of the world. Another smear against Katie Price after their split - no surprise there. Time they faced the music and realise their actions have consequences.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 11-Jan-2013 1:42 pm
Forgive me, but who actually cares? I thought I was reading The Lawyer, not Heat magazine.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
J | 11-Jan-2013 7:25 pm
No fan of Celeb's and the fickle culture we are bombarded with, but I do feel K.Price has been slaughtered in the press for the past 4 years, so if she has been smeared and someone has set out to destroy her in the publics opinion, to look the villian, I trust Justice will be served. BUT, do Judges follow such stories? And do they know what tricks are played by PR/Press reports? Even Levenson, who I trust, was mislead IMO!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment