Amy Winehouse’s friend refused money to make legal action ‘go away’, court told

By Callum Parke, Press Association Law Reporter

A friend of Amy Winehouse told the singer’s father that she would rather set money on fire than “give him a penny” when he offered her thousands to make possible legal action against her “all go away”, the British High Court has been told.

Mitch Winehouse, acting as the administrator of his daughter’s estate, is suing her stylist, Naomi Parry, and friend, Catriona Gourlay, for hundreds of thousands of pounds.

Lawyers for Mr Winehouse have previously told a trial in London that Ms Parry and Ms Gourlay profited from selling dozens of the singer’s items at auctions in the United States in 2021 and 2023, which he was not informed about and that they did not have the right to sell.

The women are defending the claim, and their barristers say the items were either given as gifts by Ms Winehouse or were already owned by them.

Ms Winehouse, whose 2006 album Back To Black made her an international star, died from alcohol poisoning in 2011, aged 27.

Giving evidence for a second day on Thursday, Ms Parry told the court that Mr Winehouse was aware that she was selling items in 2021.

I told him I would rather set the money on fire than give him a penny; these were my exact words

She continued: “There is documentary evidence to show that we told him about our collections.”

The court has previously heard that the 2021 auction catalogue contained 834 items and that the sale raised 1.4 million dollars (€1.19m) for Ms Winehouse’s estate, 30 per cent of which went to the Amy Winehouse Foundation.

In her witness statement, Ms Parry said that after the auction, she was contacted by Darren Julien, the president of Julien’s Auctions in Los Angeles, who organised the sale, who said that Mr Winehouse “didn’t really understand that most of the major items sold” were hers.

She continued that Mr Winehouse then claimed that she had “stolen” items from a lock-up facility where some of the singer’s belongings were stored.

She said: “I was devastated and angry that he would say these things. These accusations were completely wrong.”

She continued: “Additionally, Mitch had seen numerous press articles and inventories containing my items.”

She added: “On or around 22 November 2021, I called Mitch and asked what was going on and told him this was pure greed.

“He offered me 250,000 dollars (€213,000) of the proceeds of the sale (of) my collection in exchange for the rest, to make this all go away.

“I told him I would rather set the money on fire than give him a penny; these were my exact words.”

Henry Legge KC, for Mr Winehouse, previously told the court in written submissions that Ms Parry and Ms Gourlay “deliberately concealed” that they were auctioning items and that they were asserting ownership of them.

Mr Legge also said that Ms Parry was “instrumental in persuading Mr Winehouse to auction the estate’s items”, but did not tell him that she “stood to gain from his agreeing to do so”.

During Mr Winehouse’s evidence on Tuesday, the court heard that he had told The Sunday Times last year he had gone to the police about the case.

It was only after the auction, when they had done really well… that is when he had an issue with my ownership of the dresses

Asked if he was trying to make Ms Parry and Ms Gourlay out to be criminals in the article, he said: “If they had stolen things, they would be criminals, wouldn’t they?”

He accepted that he had no evidence that Ms Parry or Ms Gourlay had taken anything from the lock-up, and denied a claim from Ms Parry’s barrister that he was suing them out of “petty jealousy”.

Ms Parry told the court on Thursday that she auctioned about 60 items in 2021, which raised about 878,000 US dollars (€749,421) and included a silk mini-dress worn by Ms Winehouse in her final performance in Belgrade, Serbia, which fetched 243,200 dollars (€207,617).

Several other dresses designed by Ms Parry for the same tour, which was cancelled after the Belgrade concert about a month before her death, were also auctioned.

Ms Parry said: “At no point did Mitch ever say to me, or ask for them back, or question my ownership.

“It was only after the auction, when they had done really well… that is when he had an issue with my ownership of the dresses.”

Ms Parry also suggested in court that Mr Winehouse’s “awful reputation” had “hindered the sale of my items” and said in her witness statement that it was “very difficult at this point in time not to believe that he is using these proceedings to hurt me in any way he can”.

The trial before Sarah Clarke KC, sitting as a deputy High Court judge, is due to conclude on Friday and will resume in January.