AMY WINEHOUSE’S FATHER DENIES ‘DOING VERY WELL’ FROM DAUGHTER’S DEATH
Amy Winehouse’s father has denied “doing very well” from his daughter’s death.
Mitch Winehouse, acting as the administrator of his daughter’s estate, is bringing legal action against her stylist, Naomi Parry and friend Catriona Gourlay, seeking hundreds of thousands of pounds over claims they profited from selling dozens of items at auctions in the US in 2021 and 2023.
It is alleged that the two women did not have the right to sell the items and did not inform Mr Winehouse that they were doing so.
Ms Parry and Ms Gourlay are defending the claim, with their barristers stating that the items were either gifts from Amy Winehouse or were already owned by them.
Winehouse, the chart-topping British singer, died from alcohol poisoning aged 27 in July 2011.
At the High Court on Tuesday, Mr Winehouse said he was “very, very upset” after Beth Grossman, for Ms Parry, suggested he and the family had “done very well out of the family estate”.
“Amy passed away and, as her beneficiaries, we benefited,” he said.
“I would not say we have done well at all.”
He accepted that he was “probably” a multi-millionaire.
“I’m very upset by what you said,” Mr Winehouse continued. “Very, very upset.
“I’m going to say this to you and the court ... since Amy’s passed away, my family has given over £4m not only to the Amy Winehouse Foundation but to other charities as well.
“When you say we have done very well, it is not for personal greed. Our business is to look after, primarily, disadvantaged young people.”
Addressing the judge, he added: “My Lady, I apologise for that outburst.”
Recommended
Amy Winehouse's friends 'secretly sold' her clothes
During Mr Winehouse’s evidence on Tuesday, the court heard he told the Sunday Times last year that he had gone to the police about the case to be told that proceedings in the High Court made it a civil case.
Asked if he was trying to make Ms Parry and Ms Gourlay out to be criminals, 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 a lock-up of his daughter’s possessions.
Ms Grossman asked: “These young women are not thieves and they are not dishonest, Mr Winehouse. They have always been honest to you.
“They sold items that they owned that you knew they owned and that you were going to sell and you have said this to journalists out of nothing more than petty jealousy, because they happened to make a bit of money at the auction and you brought these proceedings for nothing more than petty jealousy as well.
“Do you have a response to that?”
Mr Winehouse replied: “Yes, you are wrong.”
The auction raised about $1.4m (£1.05m) for the estate, which Mr Winehouse said he was “disappointed” with, having kept a tally and believed the estate would be getting more than $2m (£1.5m).
Ms Grossman asked whether it was his case that her client and Ms Gourlay, who were “living pretty much hand to mouth”, were putting items into the auction to benefit him and the foundation.
“Yes, that is what we assumed,” Mr Winehouse said.
He also told the court that he believed “everything in the auction catalogue belonged to us”.
“It was billed as a single seller auction,” he added.
The court heard organisers called it a “single-owner auction”, with Ms Parry’s barrister arguing that referred “to the celebrity, not the estate”.
The trial before Sarah Clarke KC, sitting as a deputy High Court judge, is due to conclude later this week.
2025-12-09T16:20:41Z