Peter Andre Branded Liar Over Contract Row

A judge awarded the damages, expected to run into millions of pounds, to “Mr H TV Ltd” – a company owned by Neville Hendricks which produced a series of reality television programmes featuring Andre.

Peter Andre was a key witness in a court case against his manager Claire Powell and ITV2 [Peter Andre/Instagram].

Peter was branded an “extremely unsatisfactory witness” by judge Mr Justice Flaux, who said his testimony was “exaggerated” and “particularly unreliable”.

I suspect that Mr Andre was driven to a few of the extremes he exhibited in his evidence out of loyalty to Ms Powell, but that did not make his evidence any more impressive or credible.

Hendricks sued ITV2 after his contract to produce shows including Andre’s and Kerry Katona’s was cancelled in the same year that his relationship with Powell ended.

“I am quite satisfied that no death threats were ever made by Mr Hendricks against Miss Powell or against anyone else”.

He told London’s High Court: “I completely disbelieve Mr Andre’s evidence about the alleged death threats”.

He believed, “with a few justification”, that the rumour was being spread by Miss Powell or others associated with her.

Mr Hendricks himself “tweeted some pretty unpleasant tweets” over the period from June 26 to August 17 2011 – “most of his bile was reserved for Ms Powell”, but there were a few tweets directed at Mr Andre.

The issue began when ITV2’s solicitors sent him a letter, cancelling the production agreement and accusing him of breach of contract.

After the court ruling, the producer said: “The judgement says everything that anyone needs to know about the true nature of Peter Andre”.

Attempts at mediation failed and Mr Andre’s lawyers wrote to Mr Hendricks’ company in August 2011, referring to “grossly offensive messages on Twitter”.

“But I have concluded this evidence has been made up by Mr Andre”.

The suggestion that “a grown man in the position of Mr Andre was genuinely scared by what was said in the tweets has to be viewed with considerable scepticism”, said Justice Flaux.

Mr Justice Faux ruled that ITV2’s “purported termination” of the production agreement amounted to a “repudiatory breach” of contract.

The court ruled in favour of Neville, concluding that the channel had wrongly terminated the agreement and were therefore “liable for substantial damages”.