Placeholder Content Image

Madonna sued by fans over concert starting late

<p dir="ltr">Madonna is being sued by two former fans, after her concert started more than two hours behind schedule. </p> <p dir="ltr">The lawsuit was filed in Brooklyn federal court on Wednesday, with New York residents and former fans Michael Fellows and Jonathan Hadden saying the pop star’s actions were "unconscionable and unfair.”</p> <p dir="ltr">The men are suing the veteran performer for "deceptive trade practices" and "false advertisement", after they attended her concert at the New York Barclays Center last December. </p> <p dir="ltr">As per the flyers for the show, Madonna was set to take to the stage at 8:30pm, but the highly-anticipated show didn’t begin until well after 10:30pm. </p> <p dir="ltr">The complainants said that the callous delay resulted in the fans facing issues like "limited public transportation, limited ride-sharing, and/or increased public and private transportation costs" after the show on December 13th ended past midnight. </p> <p dir="ltr">According to Fellows and Hadden, this constitutes a breach of contract.</p> <p dir="ltr">"Madonna had demonstrated flippant difficulty in ensuring a timely or complete performance, and Defendants were aware that any statement as to a start time for a show constituted, at best, optimistic speculation," the statement read.</p> <p dir="ltr">The lawsuit went on to claim that Madonna’s disregard for timeliness was not an isolated incident, with her following two shows also starting hours behind schedule. </p> <p dir="ltr">They said the performer's actions "constitute not just a breach of their contracts but also a wanton exercise in false advertising" and "negligent misrepresentation."</p> <p dir="ltr">Madonna has a history of beginning her shows late, the case claims: "Throughout her 2016 Rebel Heart Tour, her 2019-2020 Madame X Tour, and prior tours... Madonna continuously started her concerts over two hours late," with this history constituting a class-action status for the lawsuit.</p> <p dir="ltr">Back in 2016, Madonna was called out for her late behaviour, dismissively joking, “I’m hardly ever late. It’s you people that get here early that’s the problem. Just come late and I won’t have to come early.”</p> <p dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-top: 12pt; margin-bottom: 15pt;"><em>Image credits: Getty Images</em></p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

David Walliams sues BGT over leaked rant

<p>David Walliams is suing <em>Britain's Got Talent</em> over a foul-mouth hot mic rant that was leaked. </p> <p>The former <em>BGT</em> judge is seeking significant damages after show bosses stunned viewers with the announcement he had quit the show in November 2022 after 10 years on the judging panel. </p> <p>The comedian abruptly left the show after a transcript of vile comments he made about contestants while his microphone was on during a filming break was made public. </p> <p>In the leaked transcript he called an elderly gentleman a “c***” three times, and said of another contestant, “She thinks you want to f*** her, but you don’t”.</p> <p>The vulgar remarks were make during an auditions round at the London Palladium in January 2020, and were then leaked to the media. </p> <p>After the transcript was made public, Walliams issued a grovelling apology, while his legal team argued he had never intended for his remarks to be heard by contestants or the public.</p> <p>Despite his apology, Walliams resigned from the show two weeks later. </p> <p>Walliams, who is a hugely popular figure in the UK, filed legal proceedings at London’s High Court last week.</p> <p>The star is accusing Fremantle, the studio behind the ITV talent show, of a data protection breach over the leaked transcript which ultimately ended his decade-long judging career.</p> <p>In a statement issued before he quit, Walliams said, “I would like to apologise to the people I made disrespectful comments about during breaks in filming for <span id="U83896596806R9D"><em>Britain’s Got Talent</em> </span>in 2020."</p> <p>“These were private conversations and – like most conversations with friends – were never intended to be shared. Nevertheless, I am sorry.”</p> <p><em>Image credits: Getty Images</em></p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

Woman suing Bunnings over death of her father

<p>The daughter of Anthony James Georgiou, who lost his life after being placed in a headlock hold by two security guards at a Bunnings store in Melbourne, is taking legal action against the retail chain.</p> <p>Anthony, 31, was apprehended by security contractors at a Frankston Bunnings in September 2016 after attempting to steal a gas cylinder and saw blade.</p> <p>According to reports, the security officers, Abdul Habib Brenzai and George Oyee, restrained Georgiou on the ground and in a headlock, despite his pleas for help and struggles to breathe. He lost consciousness and was rushed to the hospital, where he passed away shortly afterward.</p> <p>In September 2022, a Victorian coroner then found that Georgiou’s death would not have occurred if he was not restrained by the contractors at Bunnings.</p> <p>"There seems little doubt that had Georgiou not been involved in the struggle ... he would have walked away from Bunnings that day,” coroner Darren Bracken said in his findings at the time. </p> <p>Now, represented by Slater and Gordon Lawyers, Anthony Georgiou's daughter – whose identity remains undisclosed due to her age – is suing the security officers, their employer (New Security Solutions Group), and Bunnings Warehouse. The lawsuit claims "psychological injury, shock, and financial loss" resulting from her father's untimely death.</p> <p>The statement of claim filed in the Victorian Country Court alleges that the security officers failed to exercise reasonable care and ensure Georgiou's safety by preventing him from leaving the store that day. The officers are accused of engaging in a "prolonged assault" and applying excessive pressure on his neck, actions that are deemed "intentional, reckless, and/or negligent."</p> <p>Furthermore, the security guard's employer, New Security Solutions Group, is accused of inadequate training and supervision of Brenzai and Oyee, contributing to the unfortunate incident.</p> <p>Bunnings is also facing accusations of failing to provide the guards and their employer with their code of conduct, which would have outlined their obligations regarding detaining individuals on the premises.</p> <p>Neha Pratap, a public liability lawyer from Slater and Gordon, asserted that dependents of individuals who die due to the negligence of others have the right to seek compensation. The legal team argues that Anthony's death was avoidable, and the lawsuit aims to hold the responsible parties accountable for their actions or lack thereof.</p> <p>Anthony Georgiou’s family said their “lives have been forever altered” by his death in a statement. “We wish those responsible could understand the profound impact their action or inaction has had. <span style="font-family: -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', Roboto, Oxygen, Ubuntu, Cantarell, 'Open Sans', 'Helvetica Neue', sans-serif;">Most affected is Anthony’s daughter, who has lost the joy and security that her father provided. She now lives with a constant void in her heart.”</span></p> <p><em>Images: Getty / A Current Affair</em></p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

Bizarre reasons these musicians were sued by their own fans

<p>Musicians aren’t exactly strangers to the law. From copyright lawsuits and contract breaches to brawls and bad behaviour, it’s not all that uncommon for a rock or pop star to spend a few nights behind bars. What is rare, however, is fans being responsible for landing their idol on the stand. Here are four examples of fans suing their favourite musicians for some simply bizarre reasons.</p> <p><strong>1. Rod Stewart</strong></p> <p>The 72-year-old crooner has been a lifelong super fan of Celtic F.C., and has been known to kick a ball into the crowd at his concerts from time to time. However, this seemingly harmless act has left more than one fan worse for wear. In 1990, <a href="http://ultimateclassicrock.com/rod-stewart-soccer-ball-lawsuit/" target="_blank" rel="noopener"><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">a Michigan resident was awarded US$17,000</span></strong></a> after suing Stewart for kicking a ball the ruptured a tendon in her finger, which she said affected her sex life and led to the ruin of her marriage. Then, in 2012, a Californian man copped a football in the face, fracturing his naval cavity and <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/11119759/Rod-Stewart-sued-by-fan-who-claims-he-broke-his-nose-on-a-flying-football.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener"><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">claiming US$10,000</span></strong></a> to fix it.</p> <p><strong>2. Prince</strong></p> <p>Back in 2004, the late Prince rented out a mansion belonging to NBA star basketballer Carlos Boozer, and made <a href="http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/basketball/bulls/ct-carlos-boozer-prince-house-20160421-story.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener"><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">some serious changes</span></strong></a> to the place in order to make himself feel at home. These changes included repainting the exterior of the house in purple stripes, installing black carpet in a guest room and purple monogrammed carpet in the master suite. Naturally, Boozer wasn’t thrilled. He sued Prince for over US$25,000, but later dropped the charges after the singer amended the changes. Nevertheless, Boozer remains a fan to this day.</p> <p><strong>3. Michael Jackson</strong></p> <p>Three songs from the King of Pop’s posthumous album (Michael)became the focus of <a href="http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2016/07/01/sony-music-tricked-michael-jackson-fans-buy-fake-cds/" target="_blank" rel="noopener"><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">a bizarre lawsuit</span></strong></a> between fan Vera Serova and Sony Music Entertainment. In 2014, Serova became convinced that “Breaking News”, “Monster” and “Keep Your Head Up” were not in fact sung by Jackson, regardless of the credits in the track listings. Serova’s case – a class action which continues to be fought today – cited consumer rights violation – namely that she was misled into purchasing the CD based on the belief all songs would feature the vocals of Jackson.</p> <p><strong>4. Sia</strong></p> <p>The Aussie pop star has fans all over the world, but her follower count took a dive after a 2016 performance in Tel Aviv, Israel for a very odd reason – a lack of banter. Angry fans have <a href="http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Culture/Sia-target-of-class-action-suit-by-disappointed-Tel-Aviv-concert-goers-464152" target="_blank" rel="noopener"><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">reportedly</span></strong></a> filed a class action suit against the “Chandelier” singer, complaining that the set lasted just 65 minutes and there was no stage banter between songs. Concertgoers who were unable to see Sia on stage were also disappointed that the screens on the side of the stage were not showing the performance as it happened, but rather a pre-recorded video of the singer and Kristen Wiig. Tickets for the show cost approximately US$91, so we can see why they’re less than thrilled.</p> <p><em>Image credit: Getty</em></p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

Schumacher’s family suing German magazine over fake interview

<p dir="ltr">Michael Schumacher’s family is preparing to take legal action against German tabloid magazine <em>Die Aktuelle</em>, for publishing an AI-generated “interview” with the star.</p> <p dir="ltr">The publication has been slammed for using Michael’s face on their April 15 front cover, promoting the piece as “the first interview” since the star’s skiing accident in December 2013.</p> <p dir="ltr">“No meagre, nebulous half-sentences from friends. But answers from him! By Michael Schumacher, 54!” read the text in the magazine.</p> <p dir="ltr">“It sounded deceptively real,” they added in the strapline, which was the only indicator that the piece was fake.</p> <p dir="ltr">The “interview” included quotes that insensitively described Schumacher’s recovery, following the accident where he suffered a serious brain injury.</p> <p dir="ltr">“I was so badly injured that I lay for months in a kind of artificial coma, because otherwise my body couldn’t have dealt with it all,” the quote read.</p> <p dir="ltr">“I’ve had a tough time but the hospital team has managed to bring me back to my family,” they added.</p> <p dir="ltr">It was only at the end of the article that the publication revealed that they used Character.ai, an AI chatbot, to create the interview.</p> <p dir="ltr">A spokesperson for Schumachers confirmed their intention to take legal action against <em>Die Aktuelle</em> to <em>Reuters</em> and <em>ESPN</em>.</p> <p dir="ltr">This isn’t the first time Schumacher’s family have taken action against <em>Die Aktuelle</em>.</p> <p dir="ltr">In 2015, Michael’s wife, Corinna Schumacher filed a lawsuit against the magazine after they used Corinna’s picture with the headline: “Corinna Schumacher – a new love makes her happy.”</p> <p dir="ltr">The story was actually about their daughter, Gina, but the lawsuit was dismissed.</p> <p dir="ltr"><em>Image: Getty Images</em></p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

Lawyer sued for ‘quiet quitting’

<p> A legal firm in New York have sued one of its own lawyers, accusing her of using remote work as a way to “quiet quit” while she started a new venture.</p> <p>Quiet quitting is a relatively new term that refers to employees who do nothing above the bare minimum in their role, often leading them to end up on the chopping board. </p> <p>Defendant Heather Palmore then filed a countersuit against Napoli Solnik accusing the firm of mistreating minority employees, “brazen bullying” and seeking to “intimate people who stand up to them”.</p> <p>The lawsuit, which was filed in late February 2023 in a state court, accused Palmore of “breach of fiduciary duty of loyalty, aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty of loyalty, injurious falsehood, unjust enrichment, declaratory judgement and constructive trust”.</p> <p>According to the firm’s lawsuit, Palmore “misrepresented her skill set, experience, and book of business to obtain a position with Napoli Shkolnik, where she took advantage of the new remote work environment to ‘quiet quit’ her job, and simultaneously worked for two law firms at once,”</p> <p>The firm also accused her of “performing little to no work for Napoli Shkolnik while directly competing with the firm by simultaneously running Defendant Palmore Law Group”.</p> <p>Palmore said in her counterclaim that partner Paul Napoli recruited her to be the firm’s chief trial counsel in October 2021.</p> <p>“Ms Palmore has been subjected to and witnessed egregious race and disability discrimination by senior management as part of their standard operating procedures,” she said in a lawsuit filed in Manhattan federal court. </p> <p>Palmore said she agreed to engage in mediation to settle her claims but claimed the firm used the time to “fabricate its own bogus lawsuit to file before Palmore could file her lawsuit — and gain some ill-conceived strategic advantage by filing first”.</p> <p>The firm claims Palmore was never committed to her job and that she established her own company almost as soon as she was hired.</p> <p>“Further, not even one month after defendant Palmore was hired by the plaintiff, defendant Palmore established her own separate law firm, The Palmore Group, PC, which she was operating and marketing while claiming to work on a full-time, attention, and energy basis for the plaintiff,” it said.</p> <p><em>Image credit: Instagram</em></p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

Prince Harry, Elizabeth Hurley and Elton John suing Daily Mail

<p>Prince Harry, Elton John and Elizabeth Hurley are leading a charge of celebrities and other individuals who have launched legal action against the publisher of the British Daily Mail newspaper over alleged phone-tapping and other breaches of privacy.</p> <p>The group includes the actresses Elizabeth Hurley and Sadie Frost, Elton John’s partner and filmmaker David Furnish, and Doreen Lawrence, the mother of Black teenager Stephen Lawrence who was murdered in a racist attack in 1993.</p> <p>The individuals are aware of evidence pointing to breaches of privacy by Associated Newspapers, who publish the Daily Mail newspaper, Mail on Sunday and Mail online.</p> <p>The evidence gathered includes recovered listening devices that were placed inside people’s cars and homes as well as commissioning the bugging of live, private telephone calls, law firm Hamlins said in a statement.</p> <p>Prince Harry is just one of the celebrities in question who have a turbulent past with the British tabloids, with Harry and Meghan previously saying they would have “zero engagement” with four major British papers, including the Daily Mail, accusing them of false and invasive coverage.</p> <p>The couple also cited media intrusion as a major factor in their decision to step down from royal duties and move to the United States.</p> <p>Associated Newspapers have refuted any and all allegations against illegal phone-tapping, as a spokesperson said the publisher “utterly and unambiguously” refuted the “preposterous smears”.</p> <p>They said, “These unsubstantiated and highly defamatory claims - based on no credible evidence - appear to be simply a fishing expedition by claimants and their lawyers.”</p> <p><em>Image credits: Getty Images</em></p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

Wedding venue sued for millions over "destroying" couple's big day

<p>When Russell and Marjorie Newman spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on their daughter's wedding, they hoped the big day would be perfect. </p><p>However, the fairytale wedding has ended in legal action being taken over the luxurious venue, who the Newman's claim "destroyed" their daughter's day. </p><p>Marjorie and Russell's daughter Jessica married Matt Alovis at the Brooklyn Pier 1 Hotel in September 2021, in a night that left Jessica "hysterically crying". </p><p>The Newman's filed a lawsuit in the Brooklyn Supreme Court last week, after the venue failed to disclose a new "severe" noise restriction. </p><p>The lawsuit states that the newlywed's first dance was ruined when the DJ refused to turn the music up, keeping it so low during the celebration that guests could hardly hear it. </p><p>In order to continue dancing, the newlyweds and their 200 wedding guests were allegedly forced to squeeze into a 'dingy' room off-site meant for 60 people. </p><p>"It was very, very devastating," Marjorie, who is also suing their wedding planner, Real Housewives of Miami star Guerdy Abraira, told the <a href="https://nypost.com/2022/02/06/nyc-couples-dream-wedding-destroyed-by-hotels-noise-restriction-5m-suit-claims/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noreferrer noopener">New York Post</a>.</p><p>"This was supposed to be her night to shine and it was all taken away from her."</p><p>Brooklyn Pier 1 Hotel reportedly implemented the noise restriction rule just three weeks before Jessica and Matt's wedding due to residential condos in the building, but the Newman's claim the hotel "never made them aware" of the rule. </p><p>"They never brought us in to say, 'This is what it is going to sound like or not sound like,' they never gave us the opportunity to move the venue," Russell explained. </p><p>The Newmans, who spent $150,000 on flowers alone for the wedding, are demanding $5 million from the hotel and wedding planner for the "destroyed" event caused by a "breach of contract" and the "deceptive concealment of sound restrictions" which resulted in "humiliation, indignity, distress of mind, mental suffering, inconvenience, and physical discomfort," according to the lawsuit.     </p><p>"There were countless hours spent over at least a one year planning period for what should have been a once in a lifetime special event which was single handily destroyed by the egregious actions of the defendants," the lawsuit says. </p><p><em>Image credits: Getty Images</em></p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

Police sued in $1million William Tyrrell twist

<p><em>Image: NSW Police </em></p> <p>The William Tyrrell case has taken another turn with reports emerging that NSW police have been sued by a man wrongly accused over the toddler’s disappearance.</p> <p>Sky news Political Editor Andrew Clennell on Sunday said the “wrongly accused” man received a payout of about half-a-million dollars from NSW Police, and that together with added legal costs the total sum paid out by police reportedly reached $1 million.</p> <p>“There are fears another wrongly accused suspect, who was the subject of accusations when [former lead detective] Gary Jubelin was in charge of the case, might also sue NSW Police,” he said.</p> <p>William remains missing with NSW Police now well into a renewed search. Investigators are expecting to find the toddler’s body in Kendall on the NSW Mid North Coast where he disappeared in 2014.</p> <p>Police on over the weekend took a hessian bag from the scene with at least two additional pieces of fabric placed in evidence bags and sent off for forensic testing.</p> <p>Elements of the search are expected to be subterranean, and it could be a matter of weeks or months before it comes to a conclusion, with police having so far scoured just 10-20% of the area.</p> <p>A $1 million reward also remains in place for anyone with information leading to a conviction.</p> <p>Last week, William Tyrrell’s foster parents were charged with an unrelated assault as part of the task force’s ongoing investigations and are due to face Hornsby Local Court on Tuesday.</p>

News

Placeholder Content Image

The now grown up baby from Nirvana's album cover is suing the band

<p>The baby who appeared on the famous Nirvana album cover in 1991 is now suing the band.</p> <p>Spencer Elden, who is now 30 years old, is suing surviving Nirvana band members Dave Grohl and Krist Novoselic, as well as Kurt Cobain's estate for allegedly <span>violating federal child pornography statutes and child sexual exploitation.</span></p> <p><span>The </span>lawsuit also names the photographer who snapped the image, Kirk Weddlem and the labels behind the release fo the album.</p> <p><span>Spencer was photographed naked as a child for the band's most </span>iconic album cover, and is now claiming <span>his legal guardians never signed a release “authorising the use of any images of Spencer or of his likeness, and certainly not of commercial child pornography depicting him.”</span></p> <p>Spencer claims he has <span>suffered “lifelong damages” and is also suing for distribution of private sexually explicit materials and negligence. </span></p> <p><span>The famous album cover was snapped by chance, as Spencer's father Rick was a good friend of the photographer.</span></p> <p><span>Nick spoke to NPR in 2008 and said, “[Weddle] calls us up and was like, ‘Hey Rick, wanna make 200 bucks and throw your kid in the drink.”</span></p> <p><span>The image, which shows a baby Spencer in the pool diving after a $1 note, quickly became an iconic image and Spencer has recreated the album cover several times to celebrate </span>anniversaries of the release. </p> <p>The lawsuit filed by Spencer states, <span>“The permanent harm he has proximately suffered includes but is not limited to extreme and permanent emotional distress with physical manifestations, interference with his normal development and educational progress, lifelong loss of income earning capacity, loss of past and future wages, past and future expenses for medical and psychological treatment, loss of enjoyment of life, and other losses to be described and proven at trial of this matter.”</span></p> <p><em>Image credits: Shutterstock</em></p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

Bob Dylan sued for alleged sexual abuse of 12-year-old, denies claims

<p><span style="font-weight: 400;">TRIGGER WARNING: SEXUAL ASSAULT</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">A woman has filed a suit against folk singer-songwriter Bob Dylan, alleging he gave her drugs and alcohol before sexually abusing her in 1965 when she was 12 years old.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">The civil lawsuit, filed late on Friday with the New York Supreme Court, said Dylan sexually abused the plaintiff, identified only as JC, at his New York apartment over a six-week period.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">The woman, now 68 years old, claimed in the suit that the assault has left “her emotionally scarred and psychologically damaged to this day”.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">The suit alleges Dylan established an “emotional connection” with the plaintiff to “lower [J.C.’s] inhibitions with the object of sexually abusing her, which he did, coupled with the provision of drugs, alcohol and threats of physical violence”.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">The suit claims that the emotional fallout - including depression, humiliation, and anxiety - are of “permanent and lasting natures” and have prevented the plaintiff “from attending her regular activities”.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">J.C. has brought allegations of assault, battery, false imprisonment and emotional distress against Dylan, who was in his mid-20s at the time, and is seeking unspecified damages and a jury trial.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">“The complaint speaks for itself,” J.C.’s lawyer Daniel Isaacs said.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">“She provided a lot of detailed information regarding the time in question that leaves no doubt that she was with him in the apartment during the time in question.”</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">Mr Isaacs also noted that he was able to verify the details in J.C.’s claim with the “best available research”.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">Dylan, now 80, denies claims in the lawsuit that he “exploited his status as a musician” to abuse her.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">“This 56-year-old claim is untrue and will be vigorously defended,” Dylan’s spokesman said.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">The lawsuit was submitted just before the closure of the New York Child Victims’ Act look-back window, which has allowed victims of childhood sexual abuse to file legal claims that were previously too old to pursue due to a statute of limitations.</span></p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

“The powerful and rich are not exempt”: Prince Andrew sued over alleged sexual assault

<p><span style="font-weight: 400;">TRIGGER WARNING: SEXUAL ASSAULT</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">Australian-American Virginia Giuffre, one of Jeffrey Epstein’s longtime accusers, has sued Prince Andrew, saying he sexually assaulted her when she was 17.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">Ms Giuffre’s lawyers filed the lawsuit in Manhattan federal court on Monday.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">In a statement, Ms Guiffre said the lawsuit, where she alleges she was trafficked to him and sexually abused by him, was brought under the Child Victims Act.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">Under the act, victims of childhood sexual abuse can file a lawsuit up to the age of 55 against a person or institution that may have been involved.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">“I am holding Prince Andrew accountable for what he did to me,” she said.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">“The powerful and rich are not exempt from being held responsible for their actions.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">“I hope that other victims will see that it is possible not to live in silence and fear, but to reclaim one’s life by speaking out and demanding justice.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">“I did not come to this decision lightly,” she continued.</span></p> <p><img style="width: 400px; height: 500px;" src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/7843011/82482731_153388842942400_6058970600144240907_n.jpg" alt="" data-udi="umb://media/ef68d67ff30c4f0f91e5656b1a98dbf1" /></p> <p><em><span style="font-weight: 400;">Image: Virginia Guiffre / Instagram</span></em></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">“As a mother and a wife, my family comes first - and I know that this action will subject me to further attacks by Prince Andrew and his surrogates - but I knew if I did not pursue this action, I would be letting them and victims everywhere down.”</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">In a previous interview with </span><em><span style="font-weight: 400;">BBC Newsnight </span></em><span style="font-weight: 400;">in 2019, Prince Andrew said he had never had sex with Ms Guiffre.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">“It didn’t happen,” he said.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">He continued to say he had “no recollection” of ever meeting her and that there were “a number of things that are wrong” about her account of the encounter that allegedly occurred in 2001.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">“I can absolutely categorically tell you it never happened,” Andrew said.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">According to the allegations, Prince Andrew abused Ms Guiffre multiple times while she was under the age of 18.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">On one occasion that allegedly occurred in Ghislaine Maxwell’s home in London, Guiffre was allegedly forced by Epstein, Maxwell, and Prince Andrew to have sexual intercourse with the prince against her will.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">The lawsuit also claims that on a separate occasion, Prince Andrew allegedly sexually abused Guiffre at Epstein’s New York home, where Maxwell forced Guiffre and another victim to sit on Andrew’s lap while he touched her.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">Additionally, the lawsuit alleges that Andrew sexually abused the plaintiff on Epstein’s private island in the US Virgin Islands.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">During each incident, Epstein, Maxwell, and/or Prince Andrew gave her “express or implied threats” to engage in the sexual acts with the prince, according to the lawsuit.</span></p> <p><img style="width: 500px; height: 331.54296875px;" src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/7843012/gettyimages-1192977806.jpg" alt="" data-udi="umb://media/d29f2f9760cf45bd9be04d6525fdfc5f" /></p> <p><em><span style="font-weight: 400;">Melania Trump, Prince Andrew, Gwendolyn Beck, and Jeffrey Epstein. Image: Getty</span></em></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">Ms Maxwell, 59, has pleaded not guilty to sex trafficking charges, and will face trial at Manhattan federal court in November.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">Epstein died at the age of 66 while in federal jail in Manhattan in August 2019, one month after his arrest for sex trafficking charges.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">Manhattan prosecutors have formally requested to speak with Prince Andrew as part of their continuing probe into Epstein and his encounters with women and teenage girls.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">Ms Guiffre’s action comes as a fund set up to pay Epstein’s victims announced that it had largely completed its work on Monday, after agreeing to provide $US 125 million ($NZD 179 million) to more than 135 individuals.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">The Epstein Victims Compensation Program, administered by Jordana Feldman, was designed as an alternative to lawsuits, which could take years to result in a payout.</span></p> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">Ms Feldman said 92 percent of 150 eligible applicants have accepted the payments offered by the fund, which were financed with money from Epstein’s estate.</span></p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

Paul McCartney opens up on why he sued The Beatles

<div class="post_body_wrapper"> <div class="post_body"> <div class="body_text "> <p>Paul McCartney has decided to clear up some "misconceptions" about The Beatles' infamous break-up in 1970 and shared why he decided to sue the band.</p> <p>“I suppose that when The Beatles broke up, perhaps there was a misconception that we all sort of hated each other,” McCartney, 78, told <a rel="noopener" href="https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/culture/article/paul-mccartney-interview" target="_blank" class="_e75a791d-denali-editor-page-rtflink"><em>British GQ</em></a> in a new interview.</p> <p>“What I realise now is that, because it was a family, because it was a gang, families argue. And families have disputes.</p> <p>“And some people want to do this and some people want to do that.”</p> <p>At the time, the other three members wanted to make Allan Klein their manager, which McCartney disapproved of, calling Klein a "f***ing idiot".</p> <p>“The only way for me to save The Beatles and Apple – and to release <em>Get Back</em> by Peter Jackson and which allowed us to release <em>Anthology </em>and all these great remasters of all the great Beatles records – was to sue the band,” he explained.</p> <p>“If I hadn’t done that, it would have all belonged to Allen Klein. The only way I was given to get us out of that was to do what I did.</p> <p>“I said, ‘Well, I’ll sue Allen Klein,’ and I was told I couldn’t because he wasn’t party to it. ‘You’ve got to sue The Beatles’.”</p> <p>McCartney said it was horrible having to make the decision, but it needed to be done.</p> <p>“There was no way I was going to work that hard for all my life and see it all vanish in a puff of smoke. I also knew that, if I managed to save it, I would be saving it for them (the rest of The Beatles) too.”</p> <p>Despite Lennon, Harrison and Starr eventually turning on Klein, McCartney said that there was a time that he was the reason for the band's demise and that he almost blamed himself as well.</p> <p>“I knew that that was stupid and when we eventually got back together I knew it was silly, but I think it spawned a lot of people who thought that of me,” he continued.</p> <p>After the band split, McCartney decided to turn to alcohol.</p> <p>“I just took to booze. There wasn’t much time to have mental health issues, it was just, f**k it, it’s boozing or sleeping,” he said, adding that he was inspired by his first wife Linda to get himself out of his depression by telling himself, “OK, this is really bad and I’ve got to do something about it.”</p> <p>He added, “I think that’s how I got out of it, by persuading myself that it wasn’t a good idea to give in to my depression and my doubts.”</p> </div> </div> </div>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

Baby Archie is suing the paparazzi

<p><br /><span>Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s son Archie is taking a stand against the photo agency Splash News for breaching his privacy, reports have confirmed.</span><br /><br /><span>The toddler is taking legal action against the Los Angeles based photo agency, and the case will be taken all the way through to the UK High Court.</span><br /><br /><span>Lodged by law firm Schillings, the case was brought by “Master Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor and The Duchess of Sussex, HRH”.</span><br /><br /><span>In the legal papers, Meghan is described as Archie’s “litigation friend”, which is due to the fact he is a minor.</span></p> <blockquote style="background: #FFF; border: 0; border-radius: 3px; box-shadow: 0 0 1px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.5),0 1px 10px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.15); margin: 1px; max-width: 540px; min-width: 326px; padding: 0; width: calc(100% - 2px);" class="instagram-media" data-instgrm-permalink="https://www.instagram.com/p/B_2KLHOpFHs/?utm_source=ig_embed&amp;utm_campaign=loading" data-instgrm-version="12"> <div style="padding: 16px;"> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: row; align-items: center;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 40px; margin-right: 14px; width: 40px;"></div> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 100px;"></div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 60px;"></div> </div> </div> <div style="padding: 19% 0;"></div> <div style="display: block; height: 50px; margin: 0 auto 12px; width: 50px;"></div> <div style="padding-top: 8px;"> <div style="color: #3897f0; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: 550; line-height: 18px;">View this post on Instagram</div> </div> <p style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 17px; margin-bottom: 0; margin-top: 8px; overflow: hidden; padding: 8px 0 7px; text-align: center; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap;"><a style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: 17px; text-decoration: none;" rel="noopener" href="https://www.instagram.com/p/B_2KLHOpFHs/?utm_source=ig_embed&amp;utm_campaign=loading" target="_blank">A post shared by Royal Windsors (@britishroyalfamily5543)</a> on May 6, 2020 at 5:21am PDT</p> </div> </blockquote> <p><br /><span>The case was lodged with the courts on March 25, just days before the Duke and Duchess of Sussex officially finished up their roles as senior members of the royal family.</span><br /><br /><span>The royals are suing the photo agency after they snapped photographs of Meghan Markle walking through a park on Vancouver Island in Canada last January without their permission.</span><br /><br /><span>In the photographs, the starlet was seen holding Archie in a sling while the tot was purposefully shielded from the camera.</span><br /><br /><span>The child was wrapped in winter clothes and had his back to the lens while the photograph was being taken.</span><br /><br /><span>Splash photography agency said that they will “defend itself vigorously” against the lawsuit.</span></p> <blockquote style="background: #FFF; border: 0; border-radius: 3px; box-shadow: 0 0 1px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.5),0 1px 10px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.15); margin: 1px; max-width: 540px; min-width: 326px; padding: 0; width: calc(100% - 2px);" class="instagram-media" data-instgrm-permalink="https://www.instagram.com/p/CBu-XADqgwz/?utm_source=ig_embed&amp;utm_campaign=loading" data-instgrm-version="12"> <div style="padding: 16px;"> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: row; align-items: center;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 40px; margin-right: 14px; width: 40px;"></div> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 100px;"></div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 60px;"></div> </div> </div> <div style="padding: 19% 0;"></div> <div style="display: block; height: 50px; margin: 0 auto 12px; width: 50px;"></div> <div style="padding-top: 8px;"> <div style="color: #3897f0; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: 550; line-height: 18px;">View this post on Instagram</div> </div> <p style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 17px; margin-bottom: 0; margin-top: 8px; overflow: hidden; padding: 8px 0 7px; text-align: center; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap;"><a style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: 17px; text-decoration: none;" rel="noopener" href="https://www.instagram.com/p/CBu-XADqgwz/?utm_source=ig_embed&amp;utm_campaign=loading" target="_blank">A post shared by Royal Ladies Now (@royal.ladies.now)</a> on Jun 22, 2020 at 3:26am PDT</p> </div> </blockquote> <p><br /><span>The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have been spectacularly private about their only son, despite being flung into the spotlight time and time again.</span><br /><br /><span>The couple are particular with what they share about Archie and have only released a handful of photographs and video clips of the one-year-old.</span><br /><br /><span>Harry and Meghan moved to the United States to start their life independent of the Royal family after they left The Firm back at the end of March.</span></p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

Personal trainer suing date for $236k after kiss

<p>A personal trainer is suing his date after he claims he contracted painful cold sores that developed after he kissed her. </p> <p>Martin Conway, 45, is asking for $236,000 in compensation for her “negligence”, along with 30 years of therapy. </p> <p>Mr Conway says his work became seriously impacted after catching the herpes simplex virus in 2019 from his date, Joanna Lovelace and claims she had “a moral and ethical and legal duty to warn me of the risks that I would be exposed to.”</p> <p>“I was kissed before I was informed of any cold sore,” he added. </p> <p>“It is fair, just and reasonable for the court to impose a duty of care upon the respondent, due to the risk that was negligently being taken with my health, which was reasonably foreseeable, which led to three weeks of severe acute symptoms, leading to emotional, physical and financial distress.”</p> <p>The compensation case is being heard in the Central London County Court.</p> <p>“It is fair, just and reasonable for the court to impose a duty of care upon the respondent, due to the risk that was negligently being taken with my health, which was reasonably foreseeable, which led to three weeks of severe acute symptoms, leading to emotional, physical and financial distress.”</p> <p>Conway claims he became sick with flu-like symptoms and found eating painful a few days after his date with Lovelace.</p> <p>Doctors diagnosed him with the herpes simplex virus and prescribed medication.</p> <p>He also says he had a panic attack and collapsed after seeing more ulcers appear.</p> <p>Conway alleges he was incredibly fearful of leaving his apartment, and stayed inside for weeks with the exception of doctor’s appointments. </p> <p>Lovelace’s lawyers described the claim as “frivolous and vexatious” and doomed to fail, and have denied any liability for their client. </p> <p>“The statement of case discloses no reasonable grounds for bringing the claim,” her lawyers told the court, calling the action an “abuse of the process of the court”.</p> <p>Conway is claiming $182,000 for fortnightly therapy sessions until the age of 79.</p> <p>He also wants salary protection insurance costs and payments to cover lost earnings while he was ill.</p> <p>The case is due in court later in 2020.</p>

Legal

Placeholder Content Image

Family suing after routine surgery leaves daughter brain damaged

<p>A heartbroken family are suing a Melbourne hospital after their eight-year-old daughter suffered brain damage during a routine operation.</p> <p>Taylah Burns went into hospital for surgery in November 2019 after she was suffering from headaches and a cyst was found on her brain.</p> <p>The brain surgery was meant to drain the cyst but did not work.</p> <p>After attempting the surgery for a second time to insert a shunt, Taylah emerged a different child from the operation as she suffered irreparable brain damage.</p> <p>“She doesn’t talk anymore, she doesn’t interact - she just sort of lays in the bed,” Taylah’s mother Melanie Burns told<span> </span><em><a rel="noopener" href="https://7news.com.au/news/medicine/melbourne-family-sue-monash-childrens-hospital-over-daughter-taylahs-brain-surgery-c-1045403" target="_blank">7NEWS</a></em>.</p> <p>“There is very little recovery, we have been told. We’ll get some things back, but the things we’ll get back will be at a different level,” father Cameron said.</p> <p>The family are now suing Monash Children’s Hospital for negligence.</p> <p>“A full review involving an external expert will be established, and Safer Care Victoria has been advised,” Monash Health said in a statement.</p> <p>The family are also struggling with the financial strain after the injury as both their home and car will now need to be wheelchair accessible.</p> <p>They have launched a<span> </span><a rel="noopener" href="https://www.gofundme.com/f/fvu8ts-treatment-for-taylah" target="_blank">GoFundMe page</a><span> </span>for financial support, and at time of writing, have raised over $40,000 for the treatment she needs.</p> <p><em>Photo credits:<span> </span><a rel="noopener" href="https://7news.com.au/news/medicine/melbourne-family-sue-monash-childrens-hospital-over-daughter-taylahs-brain-surgery-c-1045403" target="_blank">7News</a></em></p>

Caring

Placeholder Content Image

Robert De Niro sued for harassment and gender discrimination

<p>Robert De Niro has been accused of gender discrimination and harassment in a $12 million lawsuit filed by former employee Graham Chase Robinson.</p> <p>In a court document obtained by <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/6446423-Robinson.html">the <em>Hollywood Reporter</em></a>, Robinson alleges that De Niro and his film production company Canal Productions subjected her to a “hostile work environment” and “years of gender discrimination and harassment”, including “gratuitous unwanted physical contact”, “abusive and sexist comments”, and underpayments “because she was not a male breadwinner”.</p> <p>According to Robinson, whose most recent position at the company was vice-president of production and finance, De Niro called her a “bitch” and a “spoiled brat”, asked her to “scratch his back” and “put away his boxers”, and made her work 20 to 30 hours of overtime per week without any additional pay.</p> <p>De Niro also allegedly implied Robinson deserved a lower salary than a male staff “whose job required no greater skill, effort or responsibility” because she was “a woman without children”.</p> <p>“De Niro made demands of Ms Robinson that he never imposed on males,” said Robinson’s lawyer Alexandra Harwin.</p> <p>“De Niro’s treatment of Ms Robinson was inappropriate, demeaning, abusive, and intolerable, and he needs to be held accountable.”</p> <p>The complaint comes after De Niro’s company filed <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/film/2019/aug/19/robert-de-niro-sues-ex-employee-embezzlement-netflix-binge">a $6 million suit</a> against Robinson in August, accusing her of embezzling money and binge-watching television shows during office hours.</p> <p>Robinson argued that De Niro’s decision to sue her was “filled with baseless, bad faith and frivolous allegations” designed to “destroy her reputation” and prevent her from pursuing her claims.</p> <p>“Now, when her name is Googled, these allegations pop up on the screen,” the file read. “The results have been devastating to Ms Robinson. Her reputation and her career have been destroyed.”</p> <p>In response, De Niro’s lawyer Tom Harvey said Robinson’s claims are “beyond absurd”.</p>

Legal