Originally posted by Paralytic
View Post
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Reply to: One will not be dismissed
Collapse
You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
- You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
- You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
- If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.
Logging in...
Previously on "One will not be dismissed"
Collapse
-
I predict Virginia Giuffre being invited to Paris for a meeting to discuss the issue...
Leave a comment:
-
One will not be dismissed
Prince Andrew better sell that chalet quick.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...rginia-giuffre
Longtime Prince Andrew accuser Virginia Giuffre’s sexual abuse lawsuit against him can move forward, as a New York judge rejected the royal’s efforts to dismiss her civil claim on Wednesday.
Giuffre, who has alleged that the late financier Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell sexually abused her, said they forced her into sex with the Duke of York at age 17. She filed suit against the royal on 9 August, citing battery and intentional infliction of emotional distress.
Prince Andrew’s legal team had argued in court papers and proceedings that Giuffre’s 2009 settlement with Epstein shielded him from her lawsuit. The settlement, which was unsealed on 3 January, awarded Giuffre $500,000.
Their agreement contained a provision that stated: “Second parties and any other person or entity who could have been included as a potential defendant … from all, and all manner of, action and actions of Virginia [Giuffre], including state or federal, cause and causes of action.”
Andrew was not mentioned by name in this settlement.
In explaining why he rejected Andrew’s motion to dismiss, Manhattan federal court judge Lewis Kaplan said it was premature to consider the prince’s efforts to cast doubt on Giuffre’s accusations.
He pointed out that this push for dismissal largely relied on the royal’s claims that Giuffre’s complaint was legally insufficient, which, in turn, were rooted in Andrew’s discussion of the 2009 agreement.
Tags: None
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- How to land a temporary technology job in 2026 Today 07:01
- Spring Forecast 2026 ‘won’t put up taxes on contractors’ Yesterday 07:26
- Six things coming to contractors in 2026: a year of change, caution and (maybe) opportunity Jan 7 06:24
- Umbrella companies, beware JSL tunnel vision now that the Employment Rights Act is law Jan 6 06:11
- 26 predictions for UK IT contracting in 2026 Jan 5 07:17
- How salary sacrifice pension changes will hit contractors Dec 24 07:48
- All the big IR35/employment status cases of 2025: ranked Dec 23 08:55
- Why IT contractors are (understandably) fed up with recruitment agencies Dec 22 13:57
- Contractors, don’t fall foul of HMRC’s expenses rules this Christmas party season Dec 19 09:55
- A delay to the employment status consultation isn’t why an IR35 fix looks further out of reach Dec 18 08:22

Leave a comment: