The glamorous ex-wife of football star Shay Given is locked in a court fight with her former fiance over an Aston Martin and a £300,000 (€343,000) engagement ring.
Former model Jane Given says she should be able to keep the £200,000 (€229,000) supercar and lavish ring businessman Andrew Ralph paid for, despite dumping him and breaking off their engagement.
Ms Given began a relationship with the businessman in February 2018, having split from Ireland and Premier League legend Shay, father of her two kids, in 2013.
READ MORE: Bohemians playfully go after Raheem Sterling over new boot launch
READ MORE: Shelbourne 4-4 St Pat's: Crazy draw in Tolka Park in game of the year
During their time together, they planned to get married and he bought her an Aston Martin DBX similar to one he owned himself "so that they could have matching cars...and in matching colours".
He also handed her an engagement ring he claims is worth almost £300,000 (€343,000) during a holiday in Barbados in December 2019.
But Ms Given, 47, ended the relationship in December 2020 and disgruntled Mr Ralph, 54, is now suing her in a bid to make her give him the ring and the car back.
He says the car was "a wedding present" and since the wedding between them didn't happen it should be returned to him.
His lawyers also say that it was "expressly and/or impliedly agreed that the defendant would return the engagement ring if the marriage did not proceed".
But Ms Given is fighting the case, claiming that both the ring and the car were "gifts" that her ex has no right to now claim back.
WhatsApp messages are now set to take centre stage as evidence in the fight between the former couple as to who owns the £500,000 (€572,000) items.
Mr Justice Freedman, giving judgment in a preliminary hearing at London's High Court, said he had been shown "various WhatsApp messages" between the former couple "which are said to be informative of the intention of the parties".
He said that Ms Given "relies upon" the WhatsApp messages "as evidence" that the car and ring were handed over to her as "an absolute gift" and cannot be reclaimed by her ex.
"For example, on Monday 19 October 2020 with pictures of the car, Mr Ralph wrote 'It's your car! Xx' and 'Just enjoy your holiday and ill (sic) have it on the drive for your return' and 'Amazing wedding pressie and amazing timing so pleased x'," the judge added.
However he went on to say that there was also WhatsApp evidence relied upon by Mr Ralph to back his claim.
After the breakup "in a WhatsApp, Mr Ralph wrote within hours of the defendant leaving him: 'I'm booked to land Friday and will collect my car, my things and take back the ring so it can be sold. As a gentleman I will give you half the money (which pays for school fees) and the £80,000 (€91,500) back. Good night'," the judge said.
Mr Ralph had also "announced by email to Ms Given that he would be attending her home in the UK to take the DBX and he said: 'DBX – this had intended to be a wedding gift. There has and will not be a wedding and the car is in my name and so remains mine. I will collect it on Saturday…'. He also claimed the engagement ring, saying that he would split the proceeds as a goodwill gesture."
But Ms Given's lawyers replied, telling her ex: "With regard to the DBX car, we are informed your client had this built for her and presented it to her as a gift, complete with registration number. The engagement ring was also gifted to our client."
Mr Ralph's lawyers shot back: "Whilst the vehicle was intended to be a wedding gift, the reality is that the wedding did not take place. In the circumstances, the vehicle was never gifted to your client."
Setting out the dispute over the ring, the judge said: "The claimant pleads that it was expressly and/or impliedly agreed that the defendant would return the engagement ring if the marriage did not proceed.
"This is disputed: the defendant denies that there was any such agreement and contends that the gift of the ring was simply an absolute gift."
Mr Ralph made an application for summary judgment in relation to the car, asking the court to hand it back to him without having to go to a full trial.
But Mr Justice Freedman said that the arguments were too complex to be decided without a full court fight.
"This is a case which arises out of a relationship between two people Andrew Ralph and Jane Given," he said.
"They became engaged, but before they got married, the relationship came to an end.
"They both enjoyed expensive cars. There are disputes between the parties as to what promises or gifts, if any, were made or conferred by the claimant on the defendant."
Dismissing Mr Ralph's applications, he said: "I have concluded that the defendant has at lowest a real prospect of success in fact and in law both in defending the claims of the claimant and in maintaining her counterclaims.
"For the reasons set out above, the claimant's application for summary judgment in respect of the DBX and the associated items must fail."
The former lovers will now face each other across court in a full trial unless they can settle out of court beforehand.
ends.
READ NEXT:
Gardaí rush to beach after Irishman Damian Browne becomes first ever to row from New York to Galway
North Korea fires missile over Japan as citizens ordered to take cover in shelters
Parents warned over potential Child Benefit date change as they wait for double payment
Meghan Markle's podcast returns after break for Queen's death - but with no mention of it
Get breaking news to your inbox by signing up to our newsletter
