Amber Heard’s claim that she gave her seven million US buck (£5.5 million) divorce settlement to charity modified into as soon as a “calculated and manipulative lie”, Johnny Depp’s attorneys have faith instructed the Court docket of Allure.
The Hollywood megastar is attempting to overturn a damning Excessive Court docket ruling that he assaulted his ex-accomplice and put her in effort for her existence, and is asking the Court docket of Allure to expose a retrial of his libel claim in opposition to The Solar.
Following a 3-week trial in July final 300 and sixty five days, Mr Justice Nicol dominated that Mr Depp, 57, assaulted Ms Heard, 34, on a dozen times and put her in “effort for her existence” three instances.
The blueprint shut stumbled on that an April 2018 column calling Mr Depp a “accomplice beater” modified into as soon as “substantially accurate”.
Nonetheless the actor claims he “did now not receive a comely trial” and is applying for permission to enchantment in opposition to the ruling on the Royal Courts of Justice in London on Thursday.
His barrister Andrew Caldecott QC applied for permission to depend on “unusual proof” that Ms Heard did now not donate her divorce settlement to charity.
After the couple divorced in 2016, Ms Heard acknowledged she would wreck up the seven million US bucks between the Youngsters’s Successfully being facility Los Angeles and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).
Nonetheless, Mr Caldecott acknowledged, the medical institution wrote to Mr Depp’s enterprise adviser in 2019 to teach Ms Heard had now not made “any funds”.
The court docket heard she gave authorized 100,000 bucks (£72,000) to the medical institution and 450,000 bucks (£322,000) to the ACLU, even supposing she claims she made a additional 500,000 buck (£358,000) donation to the second charity anonymously.
In written submissions, Mr Caldecott acknowledged the pledges “bolstered Ms Heard’s credit in a unprecedented diagram”.
Nonetheless, he added, that modified into as soon as a “calculated and manipulative lie, designed to operate a potent in actual fact helpful affect from the outset”.
In November, Mr Justice Nicol rejected Mr Depp’s competitors that Ms Heard modified into as soon as a “gold-digger”, asserting in his ruling: “Her donation of the seven million US bucks to charity is hardly ever ever the act one would inquire of of a gold-digger.”
Mr Caldecott argued that the if “the fact concerning the charity claim emerged on the trial, it would have faith materially affected Mr Justice Nicol’s consideration of Ms Heard’s proof as a full”.
He acknowledged: “The proof supplied a completely extraordinary act of philanthropy, which might perchance well well have faith deeply impressed any cheap particular person.
“Her public statements expressly talked about that the ACLU donation had victims of domestic violence namely in tips.
“The subliminal message of the charity claim modified into as soon as in any match sure: Ms Heard wouldn’t treasure to have any of Mr Depp’s cash, because he had subjected her to serious violence.
“The proof supplied, and modified into as soon as clearly supposed to unusual, her in the strongest phrases as both virtuous and a sufferer.”
Mr Caldecott acknowledged Mr Depp “had his suspicions about Ms Heard’s proof” on the time of the trial, “but he had no proof to enhance them”.
The barrister added: “Ms Heard took each on hand step to suppress the proof.”
Adam Wolanski QC, representing the Solar’s creator Data Group Newspapers (NGN), acknowledged in written submissions that Mr Depp’s “unusual proof” modified into as soon as acknowledged to enhance “a theory that Ms Heard modified into as soon as a ‘gold-digger’”.
Nonetheless, he acknowledged, “the proof is now not ‘unusual’ in any appreciate, because it will probably have faith been obtained with cheap diligence for (the) trial”.
Mr Wolanski added: “The ‘unusual’ proof – which the respondents gain is reputedly credible insofar because it reveals that Ms Heard has now not but executed making her pledged funds to the charities – handiest goes to a highly peripheral and unpleaded matter and is of no relevance to the pleaded points, i.e. the 14 assaults, that Mr Justice Nicol needed to evaluate.
“The proof would have faith had no affect on Ms Heard’s credibility had it been ahead of the trial blueprint shut, because it does now not existing that Ms Heard or any of the respondents’ witnesses lied.”
She instructed the court docket: “The utility to admit the proof must therefore be refused … (and) the utility for permission to enchantment needs to be pushed apart.”
Mr Depp sued NGN in June 2018 over the column by the newspaper’s executive editor Dan Wootton, which referred to “overwhelming proof” he attacked Ms Heard.
In his judgment, Mr Justice Nicol concluded that 12 of the 14 alleged incidents of domestic violence relied on by NGN in its defence of the actor’s claim did occur.
The blueprint shut furthermore stumbled on Mr Depp put Ms Heard in “effort for her existence” on three times, including one the actress described as a “three-day hostage map” in Australia in March 2015.
Nonetheless Mr Depp’s authorized team claims Mr Justice Nicol “failed to see the competing accounts of each incident, or to instruct whether or now not he stumbled on them proved and, if that is the case, on what basis”.
They furthermore argue “the blueprint shut must have faith analysed the extent to which Ms Heard’s proof undermined her credibility when it comes to her allegations of physical assault/damage”.
True days after the ruling in November, Mr Depp supplied he had been asked by Warner Brothers to resign from his feature in the Harry Potter dash-off franchise Incredible Beasts – the very feature which precipitated Mr Wootton to demand how JK Rowling shall be “if fact be told tickled” Mr Depp modified into as soon as cast in the film.
Mr Depp is embroiled in a separate libel war in the US, having sued Ms Heard for my piece over a 2018 Washington Put up thought piece in which she claimed to be a sufferer of domestic abuse but did now not mention the actor by name.
Mr Wolanski acknowledged the actor introduced the utility to enchantment the Excessive Court docket ruling to advertise his map in the US trial “by continuing publicly to denigrate the supposedly “inequitable” English authorized direction of, at least till after the US trial has concluded”.
The actor’s 50 million buck (£35 million) US case in opposition to Ms Heard modified into as soon as currently delayed till April 2022.
The Court docket of Allure listening to, which is being livestreamed on the court docket’s YouTube channel, is attributable to attain on Thursday.
It is miles but now not identified if Lord Justice Underhill and Lord Justice Dingemans will give a ruling on Thursday, or reserve their resolution to a later date.