Mitch Winehouse has been ordered to pay just under £1 million to two of his late daughter Amy Winehouse’s friends, after a High Court judge dismissed his claim that they had secretly profited from selling her belongings.
The father of the “Back to Black” singer also faces a legal bill of at least £950,000 after pursuing the case “aggressively and relentlessly,” according to the judgment delivered on 29 July.
Mitch Winehouse brought the case against Naomi Parry and Catriona Gourlay, two women who were close to Amy during her life.
He alleged that the pair had “deliberately concealed” the sale of dozens of Amy’s items at US auctions between 2021 and 2023, and that they had profited from them without his knowledge.
The items in question were personal effects belonging to the singer, who died in 2011 aged 27. Mr Winehouse argued that the sales should not have gone ahead and that he was entitled to the proceeds.
In a ruling earlier this year, High Court Judge Sarah Clarke rejected the claim entirely. In her written judgment published this week, she found that Mr Winehouse “knew all along” about the intended sales.she said it was only after the auctions had taken place that he began to pursue the matter in an “aggressive and unpleasant” way.
“The claimant chose to bring an inherently weak claim, pursue it aggressively and relentlessly to the end, and make serious and unfounded allegations against the defendants which significantly damaged their reputations, career prospects, financial security and health,” Judge Clarke wrote.She added that Mr Winehouse had sought to expand his claim “very late in the day,” which caused a six-day trial scheduled for December and January to overrun by three days.
According to the judgment, as of April Ms Parry’s legal costs were estimated at £715,361 and Ms Gourlay’s at £487,132.the court ordered Mr Winehouse to make interim payments within two weeks: £569,330 to Ms Parry and £394,521 to Ms Gourlay.
He was also ordered to pay both women’s legal costs on an “indemnity basis,” meaning he must cover the full amount rather than a standard proportion. The judge said this reflected the seriousness of his conduct in bringing the claim
“This deliberate course of action was undertaken by the claimant with the aim of damaging the defendants’ reputations and professional prospects in order to force them to settle the litigation on his terms and pay him the proceeds of sale of their items,” she stated.
“He did so, knowing that they were vulnerable both financially and in status, and that his public allegations and insinuations of impropriety would only increase their vulnerability.
“The fact that he knowingly and deliberately did this to two young women who had stood faithfully by Amy, and also by him and his family, and who had demonstrated their honesty and integrity over many years, makes his unreasonable conduct particularly serious.”
The judge concluded that Ms Parry and Ms Gourlay “were fully entitled to defend their personal and professional reputations to the end,” given the serious allegations and Mr Winehouse’s “refusal to accept their explanations” and “unrealistic settlement offers.”she warned of the “real risk that he would thereafter be free to continue making public allegations of deceit and dishonesty against them.
Naomi Parry and Catriona Gourlay were friends of Amy and had been around her during her career. Mr Winehouse’s claim centered on the argument that they had sold items without properly informing the family.the court, however, found that he had been aware of the plans and that the lawsuit was an attempt to reclaim money after the fact.
The ruling brings an end to a bitter legal dispute that has played out over several years. For Ms Parry and Ms Gourlay, the judgment vindicates them after what the judge described as damage to their reputations and wellbeing.
For Mitch Winehouse, who has often spoken publicly about preserving his daughter’s legacy through the Amy Winehouse Foundation, the case represents a costly legal defeat.
The judge’s comments about his conduct were unusually strong, framing the lawsuit as not just legally weak but personally damaging to people who had been close to Amy.legal experts note that an order for costs on an indemnity basis is rare and usually reserved for cases where a party’s behavior is considered unreasonable.
Amy Winehouse remains one of the UK’s most celebrated and tragic musical talents. She won five Grammys in 2008 and her album Back to Black is still one of the best-selling records of the 21st century.
Since her death, her family has worked to keep her memory alive through music releases and charitable work. The legal battle over her belongings has, at times, complicated that effort
