PracticeAccounting FirmsSir Elton fails in court action against PwC

Sir Elton fails in court action against PwC

Popstar Sir Elton John has today (Monday) failed in a Court of Appeal bid to re-open his multimillion pound legal battle with PricewaterhouseCoopers.

In April last year, one of the country’s top judges in London’s High Courtthrew out his £14m damages and interest claim against the firm. In addition to losing the High Court claim Sir Elton was also left facing a potential legal costs bill estimated at around £8m.

Earlier this month, though, Sir Elton’s lawyers returned to the Appeal Courtwhere, in a complex legal fight centred on the construction of contracts,they sought to re-open the claim.

However, by a two to one majority the Court of Appeal today ruled against Sir Elton, and backed the High Court ruling. Lord Justice Robert Walker said he had ‘come to the same conclusion as the High Court judge’.

Mark Howard QC for Sir Elton had argued in the Appeal Court the singer’s claim that the accountants were negligent in failing to report to him that he and his companies, rather than his ex-manager John Reid and his companies, were bearing the costs of various outside companies whose services were used during Sir Elton’s overseas tours.

‘The total costs born by Sir Elton in this way amount to just under £7m. He claims these sums together with interest,’ said Howard. When the case was heard last year interest was already being put at a further £7m.

Howard said the claim was on the basis that failure by PwC to report on the situation had resulted in Sir Elton losing his ability to recover the money from John Reid and his companies.

In the High Court decision under challenge Justice Andrew Ferris ruled that PwC was not guilty of negligence in the way it managed the pop superstar’s affairs.

The judge said he then considered that PricewaterhouseCoopers did owe a dutyof care to Sir Elton. But he continued : ‘The loss which he seeks to recovercould not on any view be recovered by him.’

‘I am not satisfied that PricewaterhouseCoopers were negligent,’ he said.

Lord Justice Pill said he considered it ‘highly unlikely’, in the absence ofdetailed provisions on how payments were to be made, that the interpretationSir Elton put on the deal between him and John Reid and his companies wascorrect.

Related Articles

BDO’s global revenues pass $8bn

Accounting Firms BDO’s global revenues pass $8bn

5d Alia Shoaib, Reporter
Top 40 International Networks, Associations and Alliances: Finding growth amid uncertainty

Accounting Firms Top 40 International Networks, Associations and Alliances: Finding growth amid uncertainty

1w Philip Smith, Reporter
Top 40 International Networks, Associations and Alliances 2017: Big Four tussle for top spot

Accounting Firms Top 40 International Networks, Associations and Alliances 2017: Big Four tussle for top spot

1w Emma Smith, Managing Editor
BDO reports revenue growth of 5.7%

Accounting Firms BDO reports revenue growth of 5.7%

2w Alia Shoaib, Reporter
Taylorcocks announces merger with Surrey firm

Accounting Firms Taylorcocks announces merger with Surrey firm

2w Emma Smith, Managing Editor
Kingston Smith reports 7% gender pay gap

Accounting Firms Kingston Smith reports 7% gender pay gap

2w Emma Smith, Managing Editor
RSM announces two partner promotions

Accounting Firms RSM announces two partner promotions

3w Emma Smith, Managing Editor
Backsourcing: The latest accountancy trend?

Accounting Firms Backsourcing: The latest accountancy trend?

1m Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman