To make sure you never miss out on your favourite NEW stories, we're happy to send you some reminders
Click 'OK' then 'Allow' to enable notifications
Johnny Depp's lawyers have told the Court of Appeal that his ex-wife Amber Heard told a 'calculated and manipulative lie' when she claimed to have donated the $7 million (£5m) divorce settlement to charity.
The 57-year-old Pirates of the Caribbean actor is attempting to overturn a libel case ruling which concluded that he had assaulted Ms Heard following a trial.
Depp's legal team are appealing the judgement which said that in calling him a 'wife beater' The Sun newspaper's story was 'substantially true'. Upon losing that case, he was ordered to pay £628,000 in legal costs.
The Pirates of the Caribbean star and his barrister Andrew Caldecott QC now claim to have 'fresh evidence' that Heard did not donate her divorce settlement to charity.
After the pair split in 2016, 34-year-old Heard said she would be dividing the $7m between the Children's Hospital Los Angeles and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).
But Mr Caldecott QC says that the hospital wrote to Depp's business advisor telling them that his former spouse hadn't made 'any payments'.
The 'new evidence' has given Depp's team the ability to bring forward fresh allegations that Heard had been deceptive in claiming that she gave away all of the money she received away.
Speaking on behalf of Depp, Mr Caldecott QC argued that whilst she had given much of it to charities, including domestic violence organisations, she had not given away the whole amount.
That, the court heard, could have been 'a false plus to her' - as she would appear a virtuous person and a victim - and 'a false minus to him'.
According to Sky News, it is believed that Heard gave $100,000 (£72,000) to the hospital and $450,000 (£322,000) to the ACLU, although she claims she made a further $500,000 (£358,000).
News Group Newspapers (NGN) had argued that the documents that would have made the donations issue clear were available ahead of the trial last year, and therefore do not constitute significant new evidence, or enough for an appeal.
Depp's team also alleged that the judge in the original trial didn't examine the evidence carefully enough, saying that the contemporary documents, such as the recording, was downgraded in favour of oral evidence in court.
It was also argued that the judge "didn't conduct the judicial fact-finding exercise correctly" and Caldecott concluded by saying that Mr Depp is only asking for a retrial with the new evidence submitted.
Chosen for YouChosen for You
Most Read StoriesMost Read