Conor McGregor’s co-defendant, James Lawrence, has issued legal proceedings against Nikita Hand in Dublin’s High Court.
A legal firm said their client, Mr Lawrence, was seeking damages against Ms Hand over “abuse of process” after he had been subjected to “horrendous” litigation.
They said the action arose from the personal injury action taken against him, in which a jury returned a verdict of not guilty.
Ms Hand, 35, successfully sued McGregor in a civil court over an incident in which he was alleged to have “brutally raped and battered” her in a penthouse at a south Dublin hotel in December 2018.
The jury found McGregor – who told the court he had consensual sex with Ms Hand – civilly liable for sexual assault.
During the same trial in November, the jury did not find Mr Lawrence had assaulted Ms Hand at the hotel.
However, the trial judge decided that Ms Hand would not have to pay Mr Lawrence’s costs.
Ms Hand was awarded almost 250,000 euros (£214,994) in damages and McGregor was also ordered to pay about 1.3 million euros (£1.1 million) in legal costs.
McGregor then launched an appeal on five grounds, which was dismissed in full by the Court of Appeal in July.
The court also dismissed Mr Lawrence’s appeal against the trial judge’s decision not to award him his legal costs.
The judges raised the fact that McGregor had paid Mr Lawrence’s legal fees in an arrangement “shrouded in mystery”.
The court also said the impact of awarding costs to Mr Lawrence and them being passed on to McGregor should be taken into account, before dismissing Mr Lawrence’s appeal.
In a statement marked “press announcement”, Mulholland Law said it issued High Court proceedings on Friday against Ms Hand on behalf of Mr Lawrence.
“We have been instructed to seek damages arising from this abuse of process by Ms Hand, her servants and/or agents, in which our client was maliciously subjected to such horrendous litigation,” it said.
They said Mr Lawrence had co-operated fully with gardai and said the Director of Public Prosecutions determined there was no case against him.
It described the legal action taken against him as “frivolous”, “highly improper and vexatious”.
It said it had exposed him to “substantial cost implications” and “several years of media scrutiny and sensationalist tabloid publications undermining his good standing and character”.
“Our client is reluctantly bringing this action to protect his reputation and his family in pursuit of justice and to ensure truth and transparency.”
New Troubles legacy framework ‘effectively there’, says Harris
People who show support for Palestine Action ‘will be arrested’, say Met Police
Thai appeals court finds 5 activists guilty of trying to block royal motorcade in 2020
Labour veteran Alexander says return to Scotland Office a ‘real honour’
Farage tells members to expect election in next two years as Rayner quits
Murder arrest after two women die five months apart in London
