As the wait continues for the judgment in one of the most explosive cases of 2017, a rematch between the Holyoake and Candy families has been quietly scheduled for next March.
Mark Holyoake, a serial entrepreneur, is suing brothers Nick and Christian Candy alleging they “coerced” him out of millions of pounds after they lent him £12m to buy Belgravia mansion Grosvenor Gardens House, SW1, and used heavy-handed intimidation tactics to recoup the money.
The trial started in February and ended in April. It receiving much media attention. The parties are now waiting for the judge who heard the case, Mr Justice Nugee, to write his judgment.
However, in another corner of London’s High Court, in Court 13 of the Royal Courts of Justice, a much more discreet legal battle is taking place between the Holyoake and Candy families.
In this claim, Nick Candy is suing Mark Holyoake’s wife Emma, Holyoake himself and three of Holyoake’s business associates over a recording Emma Holyoake made of Nick Candy while he was drunk.
So far, there have been a number of hearings, which were held in private, and two judgements on procedural matters which are public, but have been redacted.
One of the public judgments was handed down today by judge Mr Justice Warby, who is managing the case.
In it, he said that the full trial is scheduled to take place in March 2018 and is set to last three days.
He also gave general details of the new case.
Nick Candy, prior to the events that led to this year’s trial, was a family friend of the Holyoakes, and was often a guest at their home in Ibiza.
“In Ibiza one summer evening in 2010 the claimant, Mr Candy, engaged in some embarrassing behaviour when heavily intoxicated” Warby J wrote in today’s ruling on procedural matters.
“The second defendant, Mrs Holyoake, recorded it on her phone. Mr Candy knew this at the time, or at least for some of the time. The morning after, Mr Candy asked for deletion of what had been recorded (‘the Recording’). Some of the Recording was deleted but some survived,” he wrote.
“Prompted by what he interpreted as threats made in 2014, Mr Candy brought this action agains Mrs Holyoake, her husband and a third defendant in 2015. The fourth and fifth defendants were added to the claim in November 2016,” he wrote.
“In its present form, the claim against all defendants is for injunctions to restrain disclosure or dissemination of information; for the delivery up, destruction or erasure of the information; and for the disclosure of the identities of those to whom the information has been disclosed,” he wrote.
“The claims as they stand are in breach of confidence, misuse of private information, and data protection,” he wrote.
“The other defendants, beside Mr Holyoake, are three business associates of his, Messrs Wells, Lovering and Pym. Mr Candy’s pleaded case is that the five defendants shared an intention and participated in a scheme to intimidate him in the context of a business dispute by deploying the Recording against him”, the judge wrote.
Mark and Emma Holyoake and the other defendants dispute the claim. Their lawyers have been arguing for a order that Candy’s claim should be struck out.
Warby J said that the hearings have been taking place “largely in private” to “avoid prejudice to the rights asserted by Mr Candy”.
While in private practice Mark Warby QC (Warby J) was a high profile media barrister frequently representing newspapers.
He is probably most famous for representing the News of the World in a landmark privacy action brought by former FIA president Max Mosley.
Nicholas Anthony Christoper Candy -and- (1) Mark Alan Holyoake (2) Emma Adanma Holyoake (3) David Clive Wells (4) William Alexander Charles Pam (5) William Derrick Lovering
Queens Bench Division (Warby J) 22 November 2017
