I was initially thinking that seems a little unreasonable, but their reason seems less unfair:
> The Met, in the court document, said Sandhu consulted a lawyer and agreed to the confidentiality clause. Then, when she was writing the book, she agreed to repay £60,000 of the total settlement to avoid the Met seeking to injunct publication with a court order.
> The Met goes on to say because that money has not been repaid, Britain’s biggest force will sue.
I mean, if that’s true that she agreed to pay back half of her settlement to allow her to publish the book and then failed to do so, then that’s a different issue than just suing because you don’t like a book someone is publishing.
1 comment
I was initially thinking that seems a little unreasonable, but their reason seems less unfair:
> The Met, in the court document, said Sandhu consulted a lawyer and agreed to the confidentiality clause. Then, when she was writing the book, she agreed to repay £60,000 of the total settlement to avoid the Met seeking to injunct publication with a court order.
> The Met goes on to say because that money has not been repaid, Britain’s biggest force will sue.
I mean, if that’s true that she agreed to pay back half of her settlement to allow her to publish the book and then failed to do so, then that’s a different issue than just suing because you don’t like a book someone is publishing.