Andrew Tate's High Court trial over rape and sexual violence claims by four women brought forward
A judge ruled the trial, which had originally been expected to take place in February 2027, should be brought forward.
Four women are suing the former professional kickboxer over allegations of sexual violence, including that he grabbed one by the throat on several occasions in 2015, assaulted her with a belt and pointed a gun at her face. Mr Tate denies any wrongdoing.
At a hearing on Wednesday, Mrs Justice Lambert said that she was 'very keen to get on' with the case and that it should be listed sooner, fixing the trial to start on 22 June 2026.
It could last up to five weeks, with a further preliminary hearing expected to take place at a later date.
She said: 'We just need to make this happen, really. It is not in anyone's interests that this case goes into the long grass of 2027.'
Following the short hearing, the four claimants said: 'We welcome the judge's decision to bring our case forward.
'We've already spent years waiting for justice, and so it's of some comfort to hear that Andrew Tate will face these allegations in a court earlier than the original plan of 2027.'
A previous hearing in April was told that the case is believed to be a legal first as it will consider whether allegations of coercive control, in a civil context, could amount to intentional infliction of harm.
Judge Richard Armstrong said that the claimants were 'seeking damages likely to reach six figures'.
The women are bringing a civil case after the Crown Prosecution Service decided not to prosecute. Three of the British accusers were the subject of an investigation by Hertfordshire Constabulary, which was closed in 2019.
In court documents, one of the women claimed the high-profile influencer 'would strangle her or grab her by her throat if she spoke back to him or said anything that he did not like… until she told him that she loved him or apologised for whatever he demanded at the time'.
She alleged Mr Tate put her in a headlock or whipped her with a belt if she did not get out of bed and do work for his webcam business.
The documents also claim Mr Tate, 38, 'had weapons, including firearms, which were often pointed at her' and that he had 'indicated to her that he would like to kill someone if he could'.
Mr Tate maintains that her account is 'fabrication' and a 'pack of lies', and has previously described the allegations as 'unproven and untested'.
In a statement, a spokesperson for Mr Tate previously said: 'He denies ever threatening anyone with a firearm, engaging in non-consensual acts or subjecting any individual to physical or psychological harm.
'These are civil claims, brought years after the alleged events and following a CPS decision not to pursue criminal charges.
'It is deeply troubling that such graphic and one-sided accounts are being publicised before any judicial assessment has taken place.'
The statement added: 'Mr Tate will defend himself vigorously and remains confident the truth will prevail.'
Mr Tate and his brother Tristan are also facing prosecution in Romania over allegations of trafficking minors, sexual intercourse with a minor and money laundering.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
22 minutes ago
- BBC News
Pegswood 'bully' secretly bugged ex's home for five years
A "bully" who secretly bugged his ex-partner's home after tormenting her with domestic abuse during their relationship has been jailed for two years and nine Gauci, 53, hid seven listening devices in electrical sockets in the woman's home having made multiple threats to kill her during a campaign of controlling behaviour, Newcastle Crown Court woman said she had been living in "crippling" fear for years and felt "sick", paranoid and unsafe in her own of Pegswood in Northumberland, had admitted stalking but denied controlling and coercive behaviour, however jurors found him guilty of the second offence as well. Gauci was 30 and the woman 19 when they first got together in 2002, Judge Robert Spragg said, with the couple going on to have several lived separately with Gauci "like a yoyo" with his visits and in effect carrying on the life of a single man while she raised their children and waited for him, the judge she asked if would move in with her, Gauci, who ran a plumbing and heating business, refused and told her no man would want to be with her, the court heard. 'Check the sockets' In February 2016, the relationship ended and the woman started dating someone else, the court was Gauci, of Front Street, found out, he became "very jealous" and threatened to shoot her and bury her in the garden, the judge demanded the woman get back with him and then "forced" her to go to the supermarket where the other man worked and break up with him, the court judge said that was done to humiliate the woman and Gauci went on to threaten the and the woman resumed their relationship but his controlling behaviour become even worse, the court would search through her mobile phone when she was asleep, demand she video call him when she went to meet family so he could see who was there and would fly into rages, the judge relationship ended again in 2020 and two years later a friend advised her to check her electrical sockets, the courts were called and discovered listening devices in her kitchen, bedroom, living room and dining room which had been hidden there in 2017, the judge said. 'Shocking invasion' In a statement read to the court, Gauci's victim said she would "never be the same" and did not feel safe in her own said she lived in a "constant state of fear and stress" which was "crippling", adding it would always be an "open wound".The woman said she felt "sick and shocked" about the bugging and was unable to trust said Gauci had "taken everything" from her and would "bully and control" her. Judge Spragg said Gauci was "fuelled by jealousy" and sought to control every aspect of her life, culminating with the "sinister" planting of listening devices."It was a shocking invasion of her privacy," the judge said.A restraining order banning Gauci from contacting the woman was made to last indefinitely. Follow BBC North East on X, Facebook, Nextdoor and Instagram.
The Independent
26 minutes ago
- The Independent
It is time to release prisoners trapped by inhuman endless jail terms
The Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentence, introduced in 2005 under the Labour government, was intended to protect the public from serious offenders deemed too dangerous for a fixed-term release. But nearly two decades on, this law stands as one of the most egregious stains on Britain's criminal justice system. Abolished in 2012 for its inherent flaws, it nonetheless continues to trap thousands of people in a cruel legal limbo, as a debate in the House of Lords today will no doubt highlight. It is long past time that every person still serving an IPP sentence be resentenced. The continued use of this now-defunct punishment is both unjust and, arguably, inhumane. At its core, the IPP sentence allowed judges to hand out indeterminate prison terms for offences that did not justify life imprisonment but were deemed serious enough to warrant extended supervision. Offenders were given a 'tariff' – the minimum time they must serve before being considered for release. Many of these tariffs were shockingly short, some as low as two years. Yet thousands remain in prison long after these tariffs have expired. Why? Because release is dependent not on time served, but on proving to the Parole Board that they are no longer a danger to the public – a nebulous, subjective, and often unreachable standard. This flips the basic presumption of justice on its head. In a fair system, the state must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt to imprison a person. Under IPP, once the tariff is served, the burden of proof shifts unfairly to the prisoner. It is no longer the state's job to justify incarceration; it is the prisoner's burden to earn freedom. This is particularly problematic when access to rehabilitative programmes, often required for parole, is limited or unavailable – especially in overcrowded prisons. The system sets people up to fail and then blames them for not succeeding. Moreover, the psychological toll of such indefinite punishment is catastrophic. Suicide and self-harm rates among IPP prisoners are significantly higher than average. Many live in a state of constant uncertainty and despair, unsure if they will ever be released, even decades after their offence. It is not unusual to find individuals still imprisoned for minor crimes – such as theft or assault – that would today warrant only a few years behind bars, yet they languish without a release date. The punishment no longer fits the crime, if it ever did. The injustice of the IPP system has been widely recognised. The House of Commons justice committee labelled it "irredeemably flawed" and called for all remaining IPP prisoners to be resentenced. The European Court of Human Rights has also condemned aspects of the sentence as incompatible with human rights obligations. Yet the government has so far refused to act decisively, citing public safety and political sensitivity. This is a failure of courage and leadership. Protecting public safety does not require trampling basic rights or holding people indefinitely for crimes long past. Dangerous individuals can be managed through proper risk assessment and robust parole conditions – not through perpetual punishment without end. Resentencing every IPP prisoner is not only fair, it is necessary. It would give judges the opportunity to reconsider the nature and severity of each offence and impose a proportionate, fixed sentence with clear guidance for release. For many, this would mean immediate or imminent freedom; for others, it would offer clarity, rehabilitation goals, and hope – something the current system wholly lacks. Justice demands consistency, proportionality, and transparency. The IPP sentence undermines all three. Some argue that resentencing might release dangerous individuals back into society. But the risk can be responsibly managed without recourse to indeterminate detention. Modern sentencing tools, community supervision, mental health support, and parole frameworks are all capable of mitigating risk. Perpetual incarceration without due process is not a solution – it is a violation. Britain prides itself on the rule of law, but this chapter of penal policy betrays that principle. IPP sentences should not only be consigned to history – they must be actively undone. Every person still caught in this Kafkaesque trap deserves a proper sentence, a path to rehabilitation, and a chance at freedom. Anything less is a continuation of a deep and unforgivable wrong.
BBC News
27 minutes ago
- BBC News
Victims 'haunted' by Trimdon Grange child molester's attacks
A child abuser who molested two girls almost a decade apart has been jailed for 16 Tate, 48, told his young victims no one would believe them and they were to blame after he sexually abused them, Durham Crown Court Nathan Adams said both victims had been "haunted" by his from Trimdon Grange in County Durham, had denied all offending but was found guilty of five counts of engaging in sexual activity with a child. His first victim said she felt "physically sick" seeing or hearing his name, even if it was being used by someone else on said the abuse had been "devastating" for her mental health and she was "always replaying" what he did and his telling her no one would said she had been made to feel as though the abuse was her fault but she now knew the truth. 'Took childhood away' Tate's second victim, who he abused about nine years after the first, said the assault had "tortured" her said she had been a "scared little girl" and Tate "convinced" her she was to blame for what happened."You took away my childhood but you will not take away my future," the victim said, adding he had "never been man enough" to admit what he Adams said despite Tate's "protestations of innocence" and complete lack of remorse, "clearly [the abuse] took place".He said both victims were "haunted" by the memories of Tate's been deemed to be an "offender of particular concern", Tate, of Hopper Terrace, will have to serve a further year on extended licence upon his eventual release from will also have to sign the sex offenders register for life and comply with a sexual harm prevention order banning him from being in the company of any girl under 18, for 20 years. Follow BBC North East on X, Facebook, Nextdoor and Instagram.
