| 6.3°C Dublin

Judge criticises Katie Price as he rules she should pay damages to ex-husband

Cage fighter Alex Reid said Price, who is bankrupt, had made a series of disclosures which led to him being ‘denigrated in the street’.

Close

Alex Reid and Katie Price (Ian West/PA)

Alex Reid and Katie Price (Ian West/PA)

Alex Reid and Katie Price (Ian West/PA)

Former model Katie Price has been criticised by a High Court judge who ruled that she should pay ex-husband Alex Reid £25,000 as a result of misusing private information about his sex life.

Reid, 44, a cage fighter, had sued Price, 41, alleging breach of confidence, misuse of private information and breach of contract.

He said Price had made a series of disclosures about his sex life which led to him being “denigrated in the street”.

Mr Justice Warby ruled on the size of a damages award on Friday after analysing arguments at a High Court hearing in London on Monday.

Katie Price court battle
Katie Price was sued by her ex-husband, Alex Reid (Steve Parsons/PA)

Another judge had ruled in November that Reid was entitled to damages.

Mr Justice Warby was told that Price was bankrupt.

Barrister Philip Williams, who represented Reid, accepted that any damages award was “potentially academic”.

He indicated that Reid would be in a “line of creditors”.

Mr Justice Warby said Price’s behaviour had been “flagrant, arrogant, high-handed, and inexcusable”.

The judge said Reid’s perception that she had “acted maliciously” was “reasonable”.

He said Reid had suffered distress and was entitled to be compensated.

Mr Williams argued that Price’s “wrongdoing” had “destroyed” Reid’s life.

The judge said that submission was a “rhetorical exaggeration”.

Katie Price court case
Alex Reid and Katie Price married in Las Vegas in 2010 (Ian West/PA)

Mr Justice Warby said Price had “not engaged” in the proceedings for 12 months.

Price married Reid at a ceremony in Las Vegas in February 2010.

The judge heard how the relationship had foundered within a year.

Their divorce had been finalised in March 2012.

Reid first became aware that Price had “obtained explicit and intimate images” of him in late 2009, the judge heard.

He had seen images on her laptop in their kitchen.

Reid had spoken to her and she had promised to delete the images, the judge heard.

He told the judge that he was “absolutely horrified” when he realised in 2013 that Price was holding on to footage of him.

Reid said he found repeated references to his sex life in the media “very demeaning and harassing”.

“He has been mocked and denigrated as a sexual deviant and predator,” said Mr Justice Warby, in a written ruling.

“He has sought counselling for stress and anxiety, which he attributes to (Price’s) disclosures.”

The judge said an “aspect of the harm” derived from “taunts about cross-dressing”.

He said he accepted that Price’s conduct had involved the “deliberate exposure to a substantial number of individuals of moving and still images of the claimant’s intimate sexual activity”.

The judge said images were taken without Reid’s consent and “disclosed in the knowledge that he positively objected”.

“I accept that (Reid) has found it demeaning to have details of his sex life disclosed, repeatedly, in this way, and that he has suffered a real loss of personal dignity and harm to his self-esteem,” said Mr Justice Warby.

“Her (Price’s) behaviour has been persistent, flagrant, arrogant, high-handed, and inexcusable, and for those reasons very distressing and hurtful to (Reid).”

PA Media