A DJ’s Legal Battle Over Injuries and Claims of Dishonesty
A renowned DJ is currently facing allegations of dishonesty in her £100,000 damages claim after it was revealed that she continued to perform globally despite stating she was unable to work due to injuries. This case has sparked a heated legal debate about the accuracy of her claims and the impact of her actions on the court proceedings.
Chloe Caillet, a 33-year-old electronic music star, suffered an injury in June 2018 when a section of brick cornice fell from a building outside the Kipferl Cafe on Golborne Road in North Kensington. The incident occurred as she was using her mobile phone, resulting in injuries to her neck, shoulder, and foot. She filed a lawsuit against the building owner, O’Hare Holdings Ltd, claiming that the accident significantly hindered her career.
However, during the trial, evidence emerged suggesting that Ms. Caillet may have been “fundamentally dishonest” in her claim. Social media and press coverage indicated that she had traveled extensively, performing at clubs, launch parties, and events around the world, including the iconic Burning Man festival in Nevada. These revelations have raised questions about the validity of her legal assertions.
Ms. Caillet explained that she misunderstood the question when filling out legal documents regarding her ability to work. She claimed that she believed the inquiry pertained to her capacity to perform as a DJ in the same manner as before the accident, rather than general work. Her lawyers emphasized that she could have been more seriously injured, as the falling brick only missed her head because she was hunched forward and looking at her phone at the time of the incident.
The building owner’s legal team is now urging the court to dismiss her claim, arguing that her alleged dishonesty is central to the case. They assert that Ms. Caillet returned to work as a DJ shortly after the accident and performed internationally at numerous high-profile venues during the six months she claimed to be unable to work. Evidence from her social media accounts, including posts that were later deleted, supports this claim.
Ms. Caillet, who has played at some of the world’s most renowned clubs and soundtracked catwalk shows, has led a jet-set lifestyle, having lived in New York, Bristol, and Ibiza. At the time of the accident, she was based in Kensal Rise, north west London. According to court documents, she sustained soft-tissue injuries, back injuries, bruising, and abrasions, along with psychiatric after-effects such as dizziness, sleep disturbances, anxiety, and memory impairment.
During the trial, barrister Philip Grundy highlighted that Ms. Caillet was fortunate not to have been hit more severely. He noted that she maintained that the event was frightening and that she was lucky not to have been worse off. However, the defense argued that her claims of being unable to work for six months were fundamentally dishonest.
The building owner admitted liability for the accident but accused Ms. Caillet of dishonesty after an investigation into her social media activity revealed her participation in various events across the globe. These included the Burning Man Festival, magazine launches in New York, a Burberry event, and an Andy Warhol exhibition opening. The defense pointed out that her Instagram account showed relentless self-promotion and travel for performances across several continents.
In her testimony, Ms. Caillet acknowledged that her answers were inaccurate but attributed this to a misunderstanding of the term “performance.” She clarified that she interpreted the question as referring to front-facing DJ sets rather than promotional appearances at fashion events. She stated that these activities were passive and involved pre-recorded playlists or simply being present for publicity purposes.
Her barrister, Mr. Grundy, defended her by stating that she did not lie and that she suffered losses due to the accident. He emphasized that she was not able to work as she had before the incident, except in minor or casual ways for several months. He also noted that she earned money during this period but would have made more if not for the accident.
Ms. Caillet is seeking £99,851 in damages, with approximately £62,000 representing lost income over the six months following the accident. The trial continues as both sides present their arguments, highlighting the complexities of personal injury claims and the role of social media in legal proceedings.