Northern Ireland

Carl Frampton sues YouTuber claiming he breached his privacy on an expensive watch purchase

Former world champion boxer says he’s had to pay for extra security

Carl Frampton: "The more I watch of him (Jamel Herring), the more I believe I can beat him."
Carl Frampton

A YouTuber allegedly breached retired boxing star Carl Frampton’s confidence by disclosing details of a high-end watch purchase, the High Court has been told.

Nico Leonard Van Der Horst also exploited the former two-weight world champion’s reputation in an online video, it was claimed.

Mr Frampton is suing the entrepreneur and specialist watch advisor, seeking damages for misuse of private information.

Proceedings relate to a posting Nico Leonard made on his YouTube channel in April 2022.

The court heard that the video was broadcast under the title ‘Watch expert reacts to Tyson Fury’s insane watch collection’.

A YouTube video uploaded by Nico Leonard Van Der Horst on Monday
A YouTube video by Nico Leonard Van Der Horst

But it also allegedly revealed details about an expensive watch purchased by Mr Frampton.

His barrister, Peter Girvan, claimed the video was offensive and derogatory, and published to promote the defendant’s business.

“It exploited my client’s name, image and renown,” he submitted.

A judge was told requests were made to either take down the clip or edit out any reference to Mr Frampton.

However, there were more than 235,000 views before the content was removed.

Mr Frampton, who now works as a TV boxing pundit and attended the hearing, is claiming damages for breach of confidence, misuse of private information, and breach of copyright.

“There are concerns that ownership of an expensive watch would place his family in peril at times when he is known to be away from home,” counsel added.

He alleged that the video has caused reputational damage and distress to Mr Frampton, who has had to pay for improved security.

Nico Leonard was not in court, but his barrister confirmed an application will be made to set aside an initial default judgment against him.

Peter Hopkins KC argued there was an irregularity in how it had been obtained.

“It goes without saying that the defendant denies the allegations against him and will be contesting them,” Mr Hopkins stressed.

Both sides requested an adjournment to allow time to explore a potential joint consultation on the case.

Listing a further hearing in August, Master Harvey welcomed any possible moves towards resolving the dispute.