||Tabloid Pays out over Jagger Daughter Story
LONDON (Reuters) - A businessman who was wrongly reported to have romped naked on beach with Mick Jagger's daughter Jade has accepted a public apology at London's High Court and "substantial" but undisclosed damages.
Mr Justice Eady was told that on 5 August the Sunday People newspaper carried a piece on pages 2 and 3 headed "It's Jumping Jade Flash!"
Solicitor Ruth Collard for Benjamin Elliot, founder and director of lifestyle company, Quintessentially (UK) Ltd, said the article added: "What happened when Jagger's daughter and Camilla's nephew went to the beach_"
The paper carried a front page trailer announcing "Jagger's daughter and Camilla's nephew in a nude sex romp on beach WORLD PICTURE EXCLUSIVE."
Miss Collard said the article was accompanied, both on the front page and inside by photographs of a naked and semi-naked man with Jade Jagger, which purported to be Mr Elliott.
"The article alleged that the claimant and Jade Jagger had "shed all their clothes as well as their inhibitions as they made mad, passionate love on the public beach in Ibiza. It further alleged that their behaviour was an embarrassment to Ms Jagger's father, Mick Jagger, and the claimant's aunt, Camilla Parker Bowles," said Miss Collard.
However, she said the allegations was "completely false."
She said the man pictured in the photographs was not Mr Elliott and when he saw the piece he was extremely upset and embarrassed.
"He was also very seriously concerned at the impact this would have on his professional reputation, as he feared that representatives of companies with which he deals, and indeed clients of Quintessentially (UK) Ltd, would believe that he would behave in the manner alleged, which was wholly inappropriate to his position," said Miss Collard. She said the paper had now apologised and acknowledged its mistake.
It had also agreed to pay Mr Elliott substantial damages and his legal costs.
For the People, counsel, Sapna Jethani said: "The defendant acknowledges that the allegations should never have been published and after learning of its mistake immediately apologised to the claimant."
She said the paper offered its sincere apologies for the distress and embarrassment caused by the article.