Holly Valance tweets about ‘karma’ after case against husband Nick Candy was thrown out of court

FORMER Neighbours star Holly Valance bragged about karma on Twitter after a legal battle against her billionaire husband was thrown out of court.

HOLLY Valance has boasted of “Karma” after a £132m ($A229m) legal battle against her billionaire husband was thrown out of London’s High Court.

Entrepreneur Mark Holyoake was branded a liar by a High Court judge today who threw out his multi-million pound damages claim against the billionaire Candy brothers, including the singer’s husband Nick Candy, reports The Sun.

Holly Valance bragged on Twitter after a court case against her husband was thrown out of court. Picture: Rex Features/Splash News

And he ordered 44-year-old Mr Holyoake to pay £5.7m ($A9.9m) within 21 days — by January 11th — towards the £11.4m ($A19.8m) current costs of the brothers in the bitter nine week court action which ended in April.

Although he has insurance of £5.5m ($A9.55m) in place, the judge said it “would not be difficult” for him to find the other £200,000 ($A347,384) to meet the interim costs order.

After the judge’s decision, Holly Valance, formerly a Neighbours actress and singer, tweeted out a photograph of The Addams Family’s Morticia holding a tea cup with the message: “That moment when you witness Karma in its full, glorious splendour”.

She also tweeted a photograph of her husband with pals David Walliams, Jimmy Carr and Vernon Kay on a “celebratory lunch”.

Ain't that somethin'! You lose. On Every. SIngle. Claim!!!!!! pic.twitter.com/hqnofs813s

— Holly Candy (@hollycandy) December 21, 2017

When the case comes back in January to decide all questions of costs including his own of around £10m ($A17m) Mr Holyoake could face a total bill of about £20m ($A35m) for his failed claim.

He immediately announced an urgent appeal.

But the brothers Nick, 44, and Christian, 43, did not escape the wrath of the judge Mr Justice Nugee who said: “None of the protagonists emerge from the trial with great credit.

“Each has been shown to have been willing to lie when they consider their commercial interests justify them doing so.”

Celebratory lunch with the boys. pic.twitter.com/atGUK04JDw

— Holly Candy (@hollycandy) December 21, 2017

The judge said Mr Holyoake “repeatedly lied” including in a statement to the court “and he and his associates resorted to forgery, deceit and impersonation”.

He threw out all claims against the Candy brothers of alleged blackmail, fraud, intimidation duress, undue influence, and unlawful interference with economic interests.

In a joint statement, the Candy brothers said: “The judgment shows that Mr Holyoake and his accomplices are well practised liars and forgers of documents, and Mr Holyoake even lied to the Court repeatedly as part of the High Court proceedings. The Judge saw through his lies and dismissed every one of Mr Holyoake’s claims.”

Mr Holyoake, a university friend of Nick Candy, sued the brothers and their CPC Group property business in a dispute over a £12m ($A20.9m) loan.

The money was provided in October 2011 to help fund Holyoake’s project at Grosvenor Gardens House, a 42-apartment mansion block in Victoria, Central London.

Nick Candy was sued by entrepreneur Mark Holyoake in a dispute over a loan. Picture: Ben A. Pruchnie/Getty Images for Novak Djokovic Foundation

The judge rejected a claim that Nick Candy threatened that his brother Christian would sell the debt to “certain people, potentially Russians”, who would “not think twice about hurting Mr Holyoake or his then pregnant wife Emma.

He also threw out claims that Mr Holyoake’s business interests, reputation and personal and family life were threatened.

The judge ruled that none of Mr Holyoake’s claims had been established and dismissed his action.

Mr Holyoake and his company Hotblack Holdings said in a statement: “We, the claimants, are in a state of disbelief that Mr Justice Nugee has not ruled in our favour and intend to seek an appeal with immediate urgency.

“Anyone reading today’s judgment will see that there are currently no winners here. I stand by our allegations and maintain that my own actions were deployed in self protection and wholly justified in the circumstances.”

The story first appeared in The Sun.