Andrew and Tristan Tate’s legal claim to be told the names of their female accusers has been thrown out by a high court judge who ruled that prosecutors had acted reasonably in treating the brothers as “notorious”.
Mr Justice Chamberlain on Friday rejected an attempt to compel the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) to inform the Tates of the identities of the women whose allegations have formed the basis for charges against the men of rape, actual bodily harm and human trafficking.
The Tates’ lawyers had argued that the director of public prosecution’s description of the brothers as “notorious” when explaining the withholding of the women’s identities illustrated how the men were being treated in an unreasonable manner that breached their right to a fair trial.
In his judgment, Chamberlain said the DPP, Stephen Parkinson, had not been “unfair” in reasoning that there was a risk that informing the brothers of the women’s names could lead to their public identification on social media. He wrote: “The high profile of the claimants was not an irrelevant factor, because it bore on the extent of the damage that would be done if they chose to name the complainants publicly.
“When considering whether the [Tates] might disclose the identities of the complainants, the fact that they are ‘of good character’ – in the technical sense used by criminal lawyers – was not determinative.
“The specialist prosecutor was not required to adopt an attitude of studied naivete. The description of the claimants as ‘notorious’ (in the response to the letter before action) was not unfair. It was consistent with the fact that they are currently banned from all Google-owned social media platforms.”
The CPS has authorised charges against Andrew Tate, 39, in relation to three alleged offences of rape, four of assault occasioning actual bodily harm, two of human trafficking and one of controlling prostitution for gain. The offences are alleged to have been committed between 2014 and 2016.
Charges have been authorised against his brother, Tristan Tate, in relation to three alleged offences of rape, six of assault occasioning actual bodily harm and two of human trafficking. The offences, involving one alleged victim, are said to have been committed between 2012 and 2016. Both men deny the allegations against them.
European arrest warrants for the brothers, who live in Romania, were secured in March 2024 but it has been agreed with the Romanian authorities that the brothers will not be extradited to the UK until separate criminal proceedings against them in that country are concluded.
The Tates were charged in 2023 by Romanian prosecutors with rape and human-trafficking offences alleged to have been committed in that country. They also contest those charges.
Earlier this week the high court heard from the Tates’ lawyers that the proceedings in Romania could mean that the two men would not be extradited to the UK until the next decade.
Lawyers for the Tates said the brothers had offered to be interviewed by Bedfordshire police in Romania and had undertaken to give up £20,000 each if they revealed the names of their accusers in the UK.
Chamberlain rejected the Tates’ argument that it was unreasonable not to take up this offer, writing that given the Tates were outside the UK, there was “no obvious legal mechanism to administer and secure payment of the sum offered as security if the undertakings were breached”.
He also agreed with the CPS that the undertakings did not mitigate the risk to the alleged victims, who had been described by the prosecution’s lawyers in court as “vulnerable”. “That was an obviously rational conclusion given that the [Tates] are persons who give every appearance of having considerable resources available to them,” wrote Chamberlain.
