Clifford takes swipe at former clients
The publicist Max Clifford was yesterday involved in bitter courtroom exchanges defending an action brought against him by Mandy Allwood, his former client whose story he marketed when she became pregnant with octuplets.
At one point the judge, Mr Justice Park, intervened when Mr Clifford attacked the reputation of Ms Allwood and her partner, Paul Hudson.
Mr Clifford also became angry when Jonathan Crystal, her counsel, questioned him over allegations that he said he would not put a cash payment through his books.
He claimed that the action at the high court in London was nothing more than an attempt by Ms Allwood to damage his professional reputation.
Ms Allwood, who is suing for breach of trust, alleges that Mr Clifford made a "secret profit" from her story when he brokered a £15,000 deal between himself and the News of the World at the same time as he was selling her tale to that Sunday tabloid. She said he did not give receipts or invoices, and secured deals with handshakes.
Mr Clifford was questioned about his claim that he told Ms Allwood about his arrangement with the News of the World in a coffee shop the day before her story was to appear in the newspaper.
Mr Crystal suggested it was "highly improbable" that the meeting would have been in a public place when the paper would have been anxious to ensure no rivals approached Ms Allwood. But Mr Clifford replied: "When it comes to breaking a story I have had more experience than you. No story I have been involved in in 30 years has leaked out."
Mr Clifford was also asked about Ms Allwood's claim that after he was paid his commission on a £39,000 cash fee she received for an television interview, he told her he was not going to put his cut, of £8,000, through the books.
The publicist said such deceit was "more consistent" with the behaviour of Ms Allwood and Mr Hudson, who had "driven away from garages without paying and had cheques bounce".
Mr Justice Park intervened to stop the case degenerating into a "general onslaught". Mr Clifford replied: "They can attack me and I can't attack them? Doesn't their past history say something about the sort of people they are? They don't have a reputation to protect. My whole business is based on my reputation."
Asked why he had not given Ms Allwood a receipt for the £8,000 he said: "For what point? I knew I had been paid. They knew I had been paid. It was paid into my company bank account so everybody knew I had been paid."
Edmund Cullen, counsel for Mr Clifford, said it was not surprising his client had "come close to losing his temper" after hearing "grotesque untruths" levelled against him.
Mr Cullen said Ms Allwood, 35, and Mr Hudson originally claimed "hundreds of thousands of pounds" from Mr Clifford but now the claim was limited to £16,200. He said of the couple: "They [made] outrageous, professionally damaging and gratuitously offensive allegations irrelevant to the issues, that could only have been made with the intention of causing Mr Clifford harm."
Their only purpose, he added, was a "misguided attempt to portray him as a man who could not be trusted".
Judgment was reserved.
At one point the judge, Mr Justice Park, intervened when Mr Clifford attacked the reputation of Ms Allwood and her partner, Paul Hudson.
Mr Clifford also became angry when Jonathan Crystal, her counsel, questioned him over allegations that he said he would not put a cash payment through his books.
He claimed that the action at the high court in London was nothing more than an attempt by Ms Allwood to damage his professional reputation.
Ms Allwood, who is suing for breach of trust, alleges that Mr Clifford made a "secret profit" from her story when he brokered a £15,000 deal between himself and the News of the World at the same time as he was selling her tale to that Sunday tabloid. She said he did not give receipts or invoices, and secured deals with handshakes.
Mr Clifford was questioned about his claim that he told Ms Allwood about his arrangement with the News of the World in a coffee shop the day before her story was to appear in the newspaper.
Mr Crystal suggested it was "highly improbable" that the meeting would have been in a public place when the paper would have been anxious to ensure no rivals approached Ms Allwood. But Mr Clifford replied: "When it comes to breaking a story I have had more experience than you. No story I have been involved in in 30 years has leaked out."
Mr Clifford was also asked about Ms Allwood's claim that after he was paid his commission on a £39,000 cash fee she received for an television interview, he told her he was not going to put his cut, of £8,000, through the books.
The publicist said such deceit was "more consistent" with the behaviour of Ms Allwood and Mr Hudson, who had "driven away from garages without paying and had cheques bounce".
Mr Justice Park intervened to stop the case degenerating into a "general onslaught". Mr Clifford replied: "They can attack me and I can't attack them? Doesn't their past history say something about the sort of people they are? They don't have a reputation to protect. My whole business is based on my reputation."
Asked why he had not given Ms Allwood a receipt for the £8,000 he said: "For what point? I knew I had been paid. They knew I had been paid. It was paid into my company bank account so everybody knew I had been paid."
Edmund Cullen, counsel for Mr Clifford, said it was not surprising his client had "come close to losing his temper" after hearing "grotesque untruths" levelled against him.
Mr Cullen said Ms Allwood, 35, and Mr Hudson originally claimed "hundreds of thousands of pounds" from Mr Clifford but now the claim was limited to £16,200. He said of the couple: "They [made] outrageous, professionally damaging and gratuitously offensive allegations irrelevant to the issues, that could only have been made with the intention of causing Mr Clifford harm."
Their only purpose, he added, was a "misguided attempt to portray him as a man who could not be trusted".
Judgment was reserved.
