|
||||||||
Lord Sugar sues Stella for £35,000 in legal costs |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,387
|
Lord Sugar sues Stella for £35,000 in legal costs
http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/l...winner-1937148
Do you think he should be suing her or is he being nasty? |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,018
|
Quote:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/l...winner-1937148
Do you think he should be suing her or is he being nasty? I think he should leave her alone and they should just both get on with their lives. |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Somewhere extremely creepy
Posts: 3,088
|
She should have listened to Lord Sugar's famous advice
"Never underestimate me because you will be making a fatal error. I know everything. I've seen everything. I've done everything." |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,934
|
It's a counter-suit, and, as her original claim was dismissed, I think he's entirely within his rights. it's not a question of "does he need the money" it's "don't mess with me".
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Titan Uranus
Posts: 31,964
|
Does this make Sugar part of the claim culture looking for an easy handout? lol
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,686
|
Quite right.
Why should he bear the cost of spurious law suits against him? |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,550
|
I understand that it was said that the claim should never have been brought. In that case Stella should expect to pay legal costs the same way you can be liable for the other teams legal costs if you lose a case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 11,486
|
Its the principal. I don't blame Alan Sugar pursuing for costs
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 9,688
|
He doesn't need the money. He should have risen above, but it shows his nature.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,249
|
You have these tribunals so that bully-boy employers cant force large costs onto losing plaintiffs.
How many little guys will want to take on an employer in case they lose? |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,587
|
Stella was the one who started this little game. I don't think Lord Sugar needs the money, but I believe that Stella's argument didn't stand up and shouldn't even have been brought. Lord Sugar may not need the money, but he was put to a lot of inconvenience and essentially slandered. I'm not at all surprised he wants her to pay up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 170
|
Well, he sued for damages, constructive dismissal is a serious accusation, newpapers talked about it. He was on his right to do it and I would have done the same thing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 12,481
|
Everyone seems to be blaming Stella. Has anyone heard her side of the story ? Remember Stella would only pursue her claim on the advice of a lawyer .
Has Stella given an interview anywhere ? I never had much of an opinion of the gruff so and so, but he really has sunk to new depths with this lawsuit . What a silly woman to give up an £85,000 job to 'work' for him . Most of the candidates are daft to give up good jobs to go on this show and face the unnecessary abuse he dishes out . |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 6,879
|
Quote:
Does this make Sugar part of the claim culture looking for an easy handout? lol
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,587
|
Quote:
Everyone seems to be blaming Stella. Has anyone heard her side of the story ? Remember Stella would only pursue her claim on the advice of a lawyer .
Has Stella given an interview anywhere ? I never had much of an opinion of the gruff so and so, but he really has sunk to new depths with this lawsuit . What a silly woman to give up an £85,000 job to 'work' for him . Most of the candidates are daft to give up good jobs to go on this show and face the unnecessary abuse he dishes out . Now, let's move onto the job itself. I think that Stella's problem was that she was completely overqualified. She was expecting to go into the company and be a high-flyer straight away, and that's not how it works. I'm surprised that Lord Sugar didn't spot that - he spotted it in Series 1 with Paul Torrisi, although Paul had said as much on his application, and Sugar told him that that wasn't what the job was about at all. The programme is called The Apprentice, and that is what the job was at the time. It has since changed to be a business partner job. Stella claims that Bordan Tkachuk told her that the job wasn't real. Bordan denies this so we'll never know if he said it or not, but it's worth knowing that none of the other five people who have got jobs have ever made any allegations like that - even Michelle, who left after a few months, has never said a word against Lord Sugar or his companies. |
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,239
|
Quote:
Everyone seems to be blaming Stella. Has anyone heard her side of the story ? Remember Stella would only pursue her claim on the advice of a lawyer .
Has Stella given an interview anywhere ? I never had much of an opinion of the gruff so and so, but he really has sunk to new depths with this lawsuit . What a silly woman to give up an £85,000 job to 'work' for him . Most of the candidates are daft to give up good jobs to go on this show and face the unnecessary abuse he dishes out . Either she had a lawyer who overestimated their chances or she decided to risk things on a case that was at best 50/50 and would make her own business career turn tits up if she lost. I'm not saying Stella didn't have a claim. However, she does appear to have taken one hell of a gamble and lost. |
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 16,500
|
Quote:
There have been interviews with her. I have read her side of the story, and I still don't understand her point. I could see it if she was hardly being paid anything, but regardless of whether or not it was a job - and I believe it was, and I'll come to that in a moment - she was being paid a £100,000 salary! That is not to be coughed at. If she wasn't enjoying the work, she was at least being paid enough money to keep her very comfortable while she found a better job for herself.
Now, let's move onto the job itself. I think that Stella's problem was that she was completely overqualified. She was expecting to go into the company and be a high-flyer straight away, and that's not how it works. I'm surprised that Lord Sugar didn't spot that - he spotted it in Series 1 with Paul Torrisi, although Paul had said as much on his application, and Sugar told him that that wasn't what the job was about at all. The programme is called The Apprentice, and that is what the job was at the time. It has since changed to be a business partner job. Stella claims that Bordan Tkachuk told her that the job wasn't real. Bordan denies this so we'll never know if he said it or not, but it's worth knowing that none of the other five people who have got jobs have ever made any allegations like that - even Michelle, who left after a few months, has never said a word against Lord Sugar or his companies. None of us except those involved really know, of course. However, I don't give the tribunal verdict much credence as I think tribunals are likely to biased in favour of employers. |
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 40
|
Hopefully however, if he wins, he'll give the winnings to charity
|
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Nottingham, UK
Posts: 11,878
|
Quote:
even Michelle, who left after a few months, has never said a word against Lord Sugar or his companies.
Quote:
I'm rather inclined to believe Stella personally.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 33,270
|
Quote:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/l...winner-1937148
Do you think he should be suing her or is he being nasty? All the positive spin about her making herself a success after her rough background, but she showed herself, not to be strong and determined but, as hard as nails and two faced. He should counter sue or else her risks ten other seedy nitwits on that show having a go at suing him. |
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 33,270
|
Quote:
I'm rather inclined to believe Stella personally. I think it's revealing that after her series they changed to the "business partner" idea. Perhaps the earlier winners had been found fulfilling roles, but this time they didn't really have anything for her. She favourably impressed me on the show; I honestly can't see her bringing a case she knew to be baseless just as a money grab - she was earning good money before Apprentice and had no need to resort to such a thing.
None of us except those involved really know, of course. However, I don't give the tribunal verdict much credence as I think tribunals are likely to biased in favour of employers. Do you now accept she is likely to be being less than honest and had a reason to do it? |
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 33,270
|
Quote:
Everyone seems to be blaming Stella. Has anyone heard her side of the story ? Remember Stella would only pursue her claim on the advice of a lawyer .
|
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 170
|
Quote:
She was being nasty when she sued him. Always thought she was a wrong un.
All the positive spin about her making herself a success after her rough background, but she showed herself, not to be strong and determined but, as hard as nails and two faced. He should counter sue or else her risks ten other seedy nitwits on that show having a go at suing him. |
|
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 7,587
|
Quote:
I should think most winners would be too canny to say it in public even if they thought it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 12,481
|
Quote:
Yeah, but you'd think someone would have said something that implied it, even if they didn't say it outright. You'd think someone would have said something like, 'I respect Lord Sugar, but we have different styles and didn't see eye to eye on a lot of things' or something along those lines. As far as I know (correct me if I'm wrong), out of eleven winners, ten of them have never said anything about Sugar that is negative in any way.
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 11:32.


