Sports star’s gag order over affair with celebrity

A HIGH- PROFILE sportsman has gone to the High Court to prevent a newspaper publishing a story about a sexual relationship he had with a female celebrity before his marriage.

The ‘successful professional’, who cannot be identified for legal reasons, was described in court as having held ‘ positions of responsibility’ in his sport. He is also well known for appearing in advertisements.

The star won an injunction last weekend preventing The Sun newspaper from running the ‘kiss and tell’ story of his relationship with the female celebrity, who can currently be referred to only as ‘X’.

The sportsman was effectively being accused of having ‘ two-timed’ his future wife by having his ‘clandestine’ affair with the other woman.

Granting a temporary injunction, Mrs Justice Elisabeth Laing described the female celebrity in less than flattering terms.

She said in a judgment: ‘ Evidence is adduced to suggest that X is a shallow, one- dimensional, cut- out character who broadcasts, and is known to broadcast, her entire private life, so that anyone embarking on a relationship with

‘Spent considerable time together’

her knowingly takes the risk that it will be made public.’ The sports star and his wife were simply referred to as ‘A1’ and ‘A2’ in the ruling.

The judge said: ‘ A1 is a prominent and successful professional sportsman who has from time to time held positions of responsibility in his sport. He is now married to A2.

‘ He seeks to restrain a national newspaper from publishing a story, to be recounted by X, about a sexual relationship between them.

‘It is common ground that the relationship was some years ago and lasted a few months. At the time of this relationship he was not married to A2, but she had been his girlfriend for a while.’

The female celebrity told the newspaper that the pair had met at times when he should have been preparing for major sporting events.

The judge added that X wished to ‘ put the record straight’, and also felt that her sportsman lover was a ‘hypocrite’.

The female celebrity ‘spent a considerable time together’ with the sportsman, and she hoped things between them ‘ could go further’, the judgment noted.

After a while X realised that the sportsman was in a long-term relationship with his future wife, but the other woman still felt that ‘we had a chance of building something together’.

Even when their sexual relationship ended the female celebrity still kept in contact with the star for a long time.

The court heard that the sportsman was also being accused of breaking rules and deceiving his then team manager ‘on a few occasions’ by ‘having a woman with him when he was staying at a hotel’.

Mrs Justice Laing added that X was aware her sportsman lover did not want to get ‘caught out’, and when they were together they were acutely aware and ‘kept an eye out for CCTV cameras for example’.

The judge continued: ‘A1’ s conduct in two-timing A2 for a relatively brief period before they married must have hurt the two women concerned when they found out about it.

‘It is not for me to moralise about such conduct. It caused private pain, but no one was corrupted or coerced. The conduct had no ramifications beyond the three people who were affected by it. It did not affect society in any way.’

The judge mentioned that the advertising campaign involving the sportsman gave the impression of him being ‘a clean-living family man’.

A further hearing in the case is expected to take place at the High Court in the coming weeks.