Who's Suing Whom: Eurovision star sues record label over contract dispute

Francesco Guerrera
Sunday 23 October 2011 07:37

GINA G, the artist who sang for Britain in the 1996 Eurovision Song Contest, is suing the record company FX Music and demanding, among other things, the payment of more than pounds 136,000.

The Australian-born singer, whose chart-topping entry "Ooh-Aah, Just A Little Bit", came seventh despite being odds-on favourite to scoop the Eurovision prize, claims that she signed an agreement with Kent-based FX on March 13 1996 to provide recordings "for the territory of the World and the Solar System". Under the contract, Gina G, whose real name is Gina Gardiner agreed to record one single, with options for a further two singles and two albums.

The writ says that two days later FX struck a deal with Warner Music UK "to produce and deliver to Warner" recordings of the singer.

Between March 1996 and September 1997 Gina G recorded and delivered to FX three singles and one complete album. According to the writ, Gina G should have received pounds 136,529.69 for this work, "but wrongfully in breach of its continuing obligations to account, the Defendant (FX Music) has failed and/or refused to pay."

The singer is also alleging that, since September 1997, FX has failed or refused to agree with Gina G on the tracks to be recorded for the second album, "within a reasonable time or at all".

In her writ, the singer also claims that because of the delay in the recording and release of the album, she "lost the opportunity to capitalise on the success of her previous singles and album, and thus suffered substantial damage to her career and future earnings".

A SUBSIDIARY of Hillsdown Holdings, the maker of Typhoo tea, is taking legal action to prevent a company from selling a range of kitchenware under the "Typhoon" brand.

Premier Brands UK, a division of the recently restructured food producer, is seeking a court injunction to stop London-based Typhoon Europe Limited and its managing director, Peter Granville Norfolk Battersby, from using the name.

In a High Court writ, Premier Brands says that it is the owner of the "Typhoo" trademark used for tea but also for a range of domestic utensils and kitchenware.

Premier alleges that Typhoon has used the name to market "a range of kitchen housewares" including scales and towel holders" in brochures and on its website www.typhooneurope.com.

The Hillsdown subsidiary claims that the use of a name so close to its own brand for a similar class of goods generated "a likelihood of confusion on the part of the public".

Moreover, the writ claims that the use of the Typhoon name has damaged the famous Typhoo tea brand because it was used for goods unrelated to tea.

"Such use of the said sign, being without due cause, takes advantage of, or is detrimental to, the distinctive character or repute of the trade mark," the writ says.

It adds that because Typhoon and its managing director "threaten and intend to continue" to use the brand, it "will suffer further loss and damage". The Hillsdown subsidiary also wants damages and delivery up of the goods in question.

AN ITALIAN bank is suing Midland Bank and other parties to demand the restitution of $1.9m allegedly transferred to the UK lender by one of the Italian company's former branch managers.

At the centre of the allegations is Gianni Martino, the manager of the Italian bank's branch in the Northern Italian city of Novara.

Credito Bergamasco, a Northern Italy-based bank, explains that the money had been deposited in a London solicitor's client account at the Midland, after a complex web of bank transactions.

The writ claims that the payments, which reached an account in Midland's Temple Fortune branch in 1997 after being moved through a number of European and US banks, were "a fraud on Credito Bergamasco which Martino perpetrated".

The Italian lender says that Martino moved the money, which was debited to one of the bank's customers, after being asked to participate in "a financial transaction in London which would guarantee him a 100 per cent return on funds invested within 60 days."

The bank claims that Midland and/or the solicitor "have been unjustly enriched at the expense of Credito Bergamasco" and that they must give the $1.9m back to Credito Bergamasco, plus interest.

Join our new commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

View comments