Katie Price privacy battle with PR firm accused of leaking confidential information to press set for High Court trial

Katie Price's High Court privacy claim for misuse of confidential information is still on course to come to trial at the High Court next May.

The model and businesswoman (pictured, Reuters) has brought an action against ex-husband Peter Andre, former manager Claire Powell and her company Can Associates Ltd, and old friend and confidante Jamelah Asmar.

She alleges that details about her private life were leaked to the press and is seeking damages and an injunction.

They deny the claim and say she has no reasonable expectation of privacy because she herself has published so much material about her private life.

And, even if her claim is successful, they say it is worth only a minimal amount.

Price's claim was first revealed by Press Gazette in April last year.

In 2012, lawyers for Asmar asked a judge to strike out the case, but Mr Justice Tugendhat refused, although he described the proceediings as a ''lamentable renewal'' of the civil litigation between Price and Andre and a feature of their relationship since their May 2009 divorce.

Price's complaint concerned disclosures in an affidavit, sworn by Asmelah in September 2009, about Price's relationship with a man, Mr A, and Price's revelation of the identity of another man, Mr B, who allegedly raped her some years ago.

In her action, Price claimed that, in October 2009, Powell, with Asmelah's knowledge and approval, offered the information in the affidavit to the News of the World.

Asmelah admitted meeting a journalist with a view to a possible article about Price and talking about her and Mr A, but said she had no recollection of discussing Mr B.

In January this year, Master McCloud stayed Price's claim because of non-compliance with a court order to exchange witness statements and ordered it to be struck out if she did not apply for relief from sanctions.

Today, the same senior High Court official exercised her discretion to allow the action against all four defendants to proceed, on condition that Price pays a sum into court as security for costs.

There will be another hearing at a later date to determine the amount to be paid and to give further directions for a trial next year.

Comments
No comments to display

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

15 + 13 =

CLOSE
CLOSE