Judge sides with shaven-headed former convict against Michael Caine’s millionaire son-in-law
High Court victory for man accused of ‘menacing’ him over £67,000
SIR MICHAEL Caine’s son-inlaw yesterday lost his case for an injunction and damages against an ex- convict debt collector he said had ‘menaced’ him for an unpaid £67,000.
A High Court judge rejected Michael Hall’s claim for up to £50,000 to cover extra security costs and an order that Kevin Fox keep away from his home and offices, saying that Mr Hall had told ‘untruths’ about the shavenheaded 45-year-old.
Security consultant Mr Fox had been sentenced to seven years in 2006 for his part in an £1.4million armed raid on a gold bullion warehouse.
In February this year, he had been pursuing a £67,000 debt allegedly owed to a former business associate of Mr Hall, Ian Wilson, now living in South Africa.
Mr Hall, 40, a millionaire property developer, told the court that his wife, actor Sir Michael’s daughter Natasha, 39, was so frightened by ‘underworld enforcer’ Mr Fox that her hair ‘turned white’.
But yesterday Mr Justice Richard Seymour dismissed Mr Hall’s claim he had been harassed by Mr Fox, saying that he had painted him as a ‘stage villain’.
He ruled that while Mr Fox might
‘Scared by physical appearance’
appear to be a ‘gangster’, he had consistently told the truth when Mr Hall had failed to be frank to the court.
Mr Hall had obtained a temporary High Court injunction earlier this year, ordering Mr Fox to keep away from his central London offices, and his homes in Wimbledon and Chelsea Harbour.
Mr Hall has two sons, Taylor and Miles – who both have ‘Michael Caine’ as their middle names – and a daughter Alegra with Natasha, who he married in 2007.
Part of the conditions of the permanent injunction Mr Hall was seeking was that Mr Fox would not come within 100 metres of him or any members of his family. However, in a damning verdict yesterday after a three-day hearing the judge made it clear that Mr Hall had made false statements to the court to get the initial injunction and refused to make it permanent.
He said it was obtained from Mr Justice Keith ‘in breach by Mr Hall of his duty to give full and frank disclosure of all relevant matters to the judge’.
In his conclusions, the judge said: ‘Mr Fox is a middle aged man of medium height. He looks as though he keeps himself fit. He is balding, but his hair is shaved.’
The judge continued: ‘Mr Hall struck me as a somewhat timorous person.
‘ It may well be the physical appearance of Mr Fox frightened Mr Hall, while various references to Mr Fox’s reputation were never made very specific.
‘Whatever that reputation was alleged to be may well have frightened Mr Hall.
‘However I’m satisfied whatever fears Mr Hall entertained were not justified by anything Mr Fox actually said or did.
‘Mr Hall would have me find Mr Fox to be some sort of stage villain.
‘I’m satisfied Mr Fox has many resources of character he can rely on without resorting to violence.’
The judge said Mr Fox’s account that he had not acted in a menacing manner had been supported by CCTV evidence from outside Mr Hall’s office.
The judge said: ‘ What he said was demonstrated to be correct.
‘The same cannot be said of the evidence of Mr Hall. I simply do not accept Mr Hall on any contested matter.
‘ This action fails and is dismissed.’
The judge even praised the
‘Some sort of stage villain’
former criminal’s skill at crossexamination during the trial, in which he represented himself.
Praising Mr Fox, he said: ‘He is obviously intelligent and prepared himself well for the trial.
‘He conducted the cross-examination of witnesses called by Mr Hall with skill and sophistication.
‘He was especially effective comparing and contrasting Mr Hall’s first witness statement with Mr Hall’s second witness statement.’
During the hearing, Mr Hall said he ‘confessed’ that his initial witness statement ‘could have been more accurate’.
But he added: ‘I wouldn’t consider the errors to be perjury.’
The judge refused to grant a request by Mr Hall’s barrister, Paul Emerson, for leave to appeal and rejected an application for costs.