The fall and fall of Sir Philip Green
He’s unmasked in Parliament after being accused of sexual harassment
SIR Philip Green faces further calls to be stripped of his knighthood over sexual harassment claims.
The tycoon was yesterday unmasked in Parliament by Lord Hain as the figure accused of trying to gag the allegations.
substantial payments to conceal the truth about serious and repeated sexual harassment, racist abuse and bullying.
“I feel it’s my duty under parliamentary privilege to name Philip Green as the individual in question given that the media have been subject to an injunction preventing publication of the full details of this story which is clearly in the public interest.”
Lord Hain said later: “I’m not disputing judges’ responsibilities or timing or anything like that, that’s a matter for the judiciary.
“I’m just charging my duty as a parliamentarian and what concerned me about this case was wealth, and power that comes with it, and abuse.
“And that was what led me to act in the way that I did.”
Arcadia chief Green broke his silence last night to insist: “To the extent that it is suggested that I have been guilty of unlawful sexual or racist behaviour, I categorically and wholly deny these allegations.”
The interim court injunction made it illegal to reveal Green’s identity or name his companies, as well as details of the claims against him.
The 20-page ruling states that in five cases “substantial payments” were made to five people who accused Green of “discreditable conduct”.
It added: “In all five cases the complaints were compromised by settlement agreements under which substantial payments were made to the complainants.”
Under these agreements “both sides undertook to keep confidential the subject matter of the complaints”. The ruling did not identify any individuals but stated that “the most serious allegations of specific and particularised incidents are denied” by the businessman.
The Telegraph provided the court with “no corroboration of those incidents but only the allegations of the employees”.
A previous High Court ruling, which could only be reported this week, found in favour of the Telegraph, stating that “in all the circumstances, the public interest in publication outweighs any confidentiality attaching to the information”.
But the Appeal Court ruled this week the judge “left out of account the important and legitimate role played by non-disclosure agreements in the consensual settlement of disputes”. It ruled: “There is a real prospect that publication by the Telegraph will cause immediate, substantial and possibly irreversible harm to all of the claimants.” Green’s lawyers Schillings have worked for Cristiano Ronaldo, Lance Armstrong and Ryan Giggs, all who have used NDAs or injunctions to silence those accusing them of wrongdoing.
The agreements were designed to protect trade secrets and commercially sensitive details. But they have increasingly been used by the rich and powerful in deals to “buy the silence” of alleged victims.
Legal experts fear the gagging clauses are allowing the powerful to act with impunity while harassment in the workplace goes unchallenged.
Shadow Women and Equalities Secretary said: “Let us pay tribute to survivors of sexual abuse and harassment, who are too often silenced and cannot command an army of lawyers to fight their corner.”
Knighthoods are taken away after a criminal conviction. But they can also be withdrawn for bringing the honours system into disrepute.
He narrowly and luckily escaped losing his knighthood over the pensions scandal. If these allegations are correct, he should certainly be stripped of it VINCE CABLE LAST NIGHT
SIR Philip Green’s expensive efforts to remain anonymous over sexual harassment claims were ended in Parliament yesterday.
Veteran politician Peter Hain used parliamentary privilege to name Green in the Lords – something he would not be able to do outside the House.
And the move sparked further demands for businessman Green to be stripped of his knighthood after he managed to cling on to it despite the collapse of the BHS chain with the loss of 11,000 jobs and a £571million pension black hole.
The 66-year-old had used a court injunction to stop the Daily Telegraph from revealing he was the figure who agreed financial settlements and nondisclosure agreements with alleged victims of sexual harassment, racist abuse and bullying. Green denies all the allegations.
Sir Vince Cable said: “I find it difficult to see how he could credibly hold on to an honour in these circumstances.
“He narrowly and luckily escaped losing his knighthood over the pensions
scandal. If these allegations are correct, he should certainly be stripped of his knighthood.” Labour MP Clive Lewis added: “If he has used his wealth to gag people and given the disgrace of what happened on the BHS pensions, how that was basically asset-stripped and the lives of thousands potentially ruined, I think it says a lot about this country if someone like that can be given a knighthood and keep their knighthood having the reputation they do.”
Neil Saunders, managing director of industry experts Global Data Retail, warned the claims against Topshop boss Green could be potentially damaging to his business.
He said: “While the allegations are only claims and have not yet been legally proven, Philip Green’s association with them is highly damaging for both him and the retail businesses he owns.
“Unless the claims are proven to be false then there is no coming back. The stench of sexual misconduct lingers for life.”
Women and Equalities Select Committee chair Maria Miller blasted judges for granting the gagging order.
She said: “Given the
huge influence Philip Green wields in the world of business it is surprising the Court of Appeal decided it wasn’t in the public interest to make public the string of payments that have been made.” The Telegraph spent eight months investigating the claims against Green. But on Tuesday, it was prevented from revealing the existence of a string of non-disclosure deals after a ruling by senior judge Sir Terence Etherton, the Master of the Rolls. Green hired a team of seven lawyers and reportedly spent nearly £500,000 on legal fees. But Labour minister Lord Hain told the Lords: “I had been contacted by someone intimately involved in the case of a powerful businessman using non-disclosure agreements and