Beckhams’ ex-nanny ‘sorry’ for breach of trust

DAVID and Victoria Beckham received a High Court apology from their former nanny yesterday over her disclosure of private and confidential information about the famous couple following her resignation.

A judge in London heard Abbie Gibson had now agreed to give “permanent undertakings of confidentiality” to the couple.

Their solicitor Gerrard Tyrrell told Mr Justice Eady: “Ms Gibson has also agreed to the withdrawal of her claim for constructive dismissal that she made against the claimants which was issued in the Employment Tribunal in August 2005.”

Tyrrell said Gibson “has unconditionally apologised to David and Victoria Beckham and their family for breaching her duties of confidence”.

He said yesterday’s proceedings against Gibson resulted from a newspaper article, captioned “Beckhams behind closed doors”.

Tyrrell said: “Between May 2003 and March 2005, Ms Gibson was employed as the nanny to David and Victoria Beckhams’ children.

“After she resigned from their employment she gave an interview to the News of the World. In this interview she disclosed private and confidential information about the Beckhams and their family.”

The paper used this information as the basis for the article published on April 24, 2005.

The solicitor also told the judge that, on July 10, 2005, The People newspaper published an article entitled Exclusive: Beckham’s Hate Calls To Nanny, which falsely stated David Beckham had made a number of insulting and threatening phone calls to Gibson.

He added: “The People have already publicly apologised for making this false and defamatory claim and have paid damages to David Beckham.

“Ms Gibson is happy to confirm David Beckham did not at any stage make any such telephone calls to her.

“She apologises if anything she said to The People gave them a false impression that such calls had been made.”

Niri Shanmuganathan, solicitor for Gibson, told Mr Justice Eady: “Ms Gibson wishes to use this opportunity to confirm that Mr Beckham has not made any rude or threatening telephone calls to her.”

She was “happy to give the undertakings of confidentiality” detailed in an order before the court.