In the time since my last post I’m not at all surprised that Mr. Fayed has tried another judicial review; it’ll be astonishing if there’s ever an end to his Diana litigation.
There’s also of course been judgment in the amazing McCartney divorce in which another strange litigant has made a fool of herself by pouring cold water on lawyers in more ways than one. An idiotic decision, surely, to try to represent yourself in such a big money case where forensic accountancy was where the action was, allied to arguments about the legal principles to be applied in the developing area of moneybags divorces.
The law this week has definitely had a flavour of Heat magazine.
Can anyone think of other media celebs undone by their own hubris in well reasoned judicial character assassination? Trudie Styler in the EAT, and Chris Evans in the High Court were two particularly enjoyable ones.
Sheer comedy – all the way down the line. My view is that Lady McCartney is borderline certifiable – but I’d be interested in a professional view.
Still, the judge was clearly of the opinion that she needs a jolly good slap. Then again, maybe she’d enjoy that, masochist that she clearly is.
Marcel Berlins has an interesting take on the McCartney divorce:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/mar/19/law