Britain’s Got Talent hopeful sues producers after audition is scrapped

A singer who tried to audition for Britain’s Got Talent six occasions has introduced he needs to sue the present’s makers for £85million compensation after his newest audition was ‘scrapped because of Covid’.

Freemantle Media, represented by barrister Mark Wilden, have denied that the corporate owes Mr Aslanyan even a penny in compensation, pointing to the actual fact the unknown singer-songwriter had the identical likelihood of showing on the present as every other contestant. 

Robert Aslanyan has not presently taken his case to any court docket and isn’t represented by a lawyer.  

Aslanyan claims he trekked from Manchester to Cardiff along with his household, friends and three technical assistants with the dream of successful an opportunity to carry out his royal tribute tune ‘Our Mother Queen’ reside on BGT and scooping the £250,000 money jackpot.

In addition to fastidiously crafting his tune, Mr Aslanyan additionally contacted the Queen’s workplace to tell her about his act and to ‘ask for her blessings’ – duly receiving a latter of appreciation from Balmoral Castle in August 2020.

But Mr Aslanyan says he was left dejected and disenchanted when, on his arrival on the Sophia Garden Hall audition centre in December 2020, safety guards knowledgeable him that each one auditions had been cancelled because of Covid.

Mr Aslanyan says no member of the BGT workers contacted him to warn that the occasion was being scrapped earlier than he set out on the 186-mile highway journey.

He and his entourage had set out ‘totally dressed and geared up with keyboard and all essential instruments’ and says he suffered ‘monetary loss’ because of his wasted journey.

But the majority of his large damages bid relies on his declare he additionally misplaced out on a profitable musical and advertising and marketing contract because of BGT’s cancellation of his audition – and their subsequent failure to provide a particular determination a few recent audition, costing him potential earnings of round £85million.

He mentioned he had signed a contract beneath which an organization named as LTOE Trade Ltd agreed to market his work as a musical undertaking titled ‘Britannia, Britannia’, however says the deal foundered because of his incapability to launch his tune on the present. 

Series 15 of Britain’s Got Talent was deliberate to air in 2021, however was postponed after producers determined to delay filming till January 2022, amid issues over easy methods to safely produce the present in the course of the pandemic.

The contract between Mr Aslanyan and LTOE stipulated that he would carry out his tune ‘Our Mother Queen’ in entrance of the BGT judges and viewers, whereas on the identical time masking your complete stage with a mural daubed within the phrases ‘Britannia, Britannia’.

And though LTOE later supplied him one other likelihood to ‘show his skill’ on the BGT 16 present in 2022, this new potential deal ended up being scrapped because of the outbreak of the Ukraine/Russia battle, he says.

Mr Aslanyan is now suing Fremantle Media Ltd – the makers of BGT – for £85,252,341 compensation, which incorporates the lack of his contract, the lack of an opportunity to win the BGT grand prize, the price of his journey to Cardiff and a £66 Tesco meals invoice for his entourage on the day of the journey.

His compensation declare additionally takes in ‘fundamental damages for ethical ache and struggling, damage emotions and lack of confidence’.

Mr Aslanyan claims the BGT workforce breached its phrases of contact, and left him hanging by failing to achieve any last determination about whether or not he was entitled to hold on along with his utility after the December 2020 cancellation and get a correct audition.

He insists he acquired no response after twice contacting senior workers for an replace on his utility in early 2021 and to determine on movies he had despatched in.

‘It was the defendant’s obligation to ship a discover to the claimant that in-person auditions had been cancelled in Cardiff because of some causes,’ he mentioned.

‘Moreover, it was the defendant’s obligation to tell Mr Aslanyan as well as with the brand new date, time and place of in-person auditions, if such had been out there and had been carried out.

‘If not, then it was the defendant’s obligation to keep up his video submissions, course of them, evaluate them pretty and to give you goal and justified determination.

‘That would permit the claimant to proceed his participation within the programme and audition in entrance of BGT Judges, and to get their determination sure or no..’

However the programme maker’s barrister Mark Wilden, denied that the corporate owed Mr Aslanyan a penny in compensation.

He says: ‘A considerable variety of opponents enter every collection of BGT. This quantity is often within the area of 10,000 opponents per collection. Only a small proportion of opponents proceed at every stage of auditions.

‘To one of the best of the defendant’s information, the claimant utilized to compete in not less than the final 4 collection of BGT beneath six separate purposes. The claimant was invited to attend not less than 5 open in-person auditions and attended three.

‘For every of the claimant’s purposes, the respective BGT producers acted inside the phrases relevant to the related BGT collection always.

‘The determination of whether or not every competitor proceeds to judges’ auditions is made solely by a number of BGT producers appointed by the defendant and is made fully at their unfettered discretion.

‘The claimant seeks to indicate obligations right into a contract between the events which don’t and by no means did type a part of any such contract. The defendant by no means owed the alleged obligations and accordingly there may have been no breach.

‘The info as pleaded don’t display breach by the defendant of any such obligation, or of any lawfully enforceable obligation.

‘The whole declare is liable to be struck out…as a result of it discloses no affordable grounds for bringing the declare.’

The dispute has but to achieve court docket – with no date fastened for a trial.