Decision reserved in Dublin woman's case against Rihanna over alleged 'malicious falsehoods'

A judge has reserved her decision in a challenge by singer Rihanna to High Court proceedings brought against her by an Irish woman over alleged "malicious falsehoods" in an email and a phone call.

Decision reserved in Dublin woman's case against Rihanna over alleged 'malicious falsehoods'

By Ann O'Loughlin

A judge has reserved her decision in a challenge by singer Rihanna to High Court proceedings brought against her by an Irish woman over alleged "malicious falsehoods" in an email and a phone call.

Dana Kavanagh (43), Woodbank Drive, Valley Park, Finglas, Dublin is suing Rihanna under the name "Robyn Fenty aka Rihanna", with an address at Lafayette Street, New York.

Rihanna asked the court to set aside service of Ms Kavanagh's proceedings on her at her New York home claiming it was not done in accordance with law.

Ms Kavanagh opposed the application.

Following the completion of submissions on behalf of both sides today Ms Justice Miriam O'Regan reserved her decision.

Ms Kavanagh claims she was caused mental distress and emotional suffering as a result of what she says was a false and malicious email sent on July 11, 2013, about her (Kavanagh's) husband Geoffrey Keating who was Rihanna's head of security in 2012 and 2013.

She is also suing over a phone call the singer allegedly made to Ms Kavanagh's sister-in-law in relation to the same matter.

She claims that as a result of the allegations a business she built up with Mr Keating, called Geoff Keating Media, had been destroyed.

Rihanna denies the claims.

Her lawyers argued the purported service of proceedings on the singer's New York home should be set aside by the court because it was not done in accordance with international, US federal or New York State law.

Ms Kavangh's side claimed the singer is seeking to obstruct the bringing of proceedings against her in Ireland.

Rihanna had not challenged the jurisdiction of Ireland as the place for the hearing of the case and had not sworn an affidavit explaining whether she had received the papers in the case or not, it was also claimed.

x

More in this section

Lunchtime News

Newsletter

Keep up with stories of the day with our lunchtime news wrap and important breaking news alerts.

Cookie Policy Privacy Policy Brand Safety FAQ Help Contact Us Terms and Conditions

© Examiner Echo Group Limited