Katy Perry has been involved in some wild legal issues over the years.
Perry has been to court on more than one occasion regarding legal issues over buying property. The first instance is from 2015 when she sued a group of nuns who tried to block her from purchasing their convent.
More recently, Perry and her fiancé, Orlando Bloom, went to trial over the sale of their Santa Barbara home. The former owner claimed he was not in the right state of mind to sell the property due to his declining health and was forced to sell the home to Perry and Bloom.
Keep scrolling to see Perry’s strangest legal issues over the years:
Legal Battle With Nuns
Perry sued a group of the Sisters of the Immaculate Heart of Mary after the singer attempted to purchase their former convent in Los Angeles. According to the New York Times, the nuns purchased the property in 1972 from businessman Daniel Donohue. However, the Archdiocese of Los Angeles forced the remaining sisters to relocate against their will in 2011, per Billboard.
Years later, Archbishop Jose Gomez agreed to sell the property to Perry without any input from the nuns. Perry, who grew up with a religious background, made an offer to pay for the estate with $14.5 million in cash, which Gomez accepted.
After learning that Perry wanted to buy their former home, two of the nuns researched Perry. The women were allegedly appalled by her after watching some of her past interviews and performances. In 2015, Perry ended up meeting with the two nuns and reportedly sang the gospel song “Oh Happy Day” for them and showed them her “Jesus” tattoo on her wrist.
Before Perry could complete the sale with Gomez, the nuns, who believed they owned the land, decided to sell the property to restaurateur and developer Dana Hollister. After handing over the deed, Perry and the archdiocese sued the nuns for selling the land and Hollister. A judge ruled in favor of Perry by invalidating Hollister’s purchase.
In 2017, Perry won the right to purchase the convent but she needed approval from the Vatican. According to Billboard, any sale of church property that exceeds $7.5 million requires final approval from the Vatican. Later that year, the Vatican decided that they would not approve Perry’s purchase until she found a replacement for the property’s House of Prayer.
Later that year, a jury found that Hollister intentionally interfered with Perry’s purchase. Hollister was ordered to pay the archdiocese $3.47 million in attorney fees and Perry’s company $1.57 million in fees. She was found guilty of malice and fraud. Hollister declared bankruptcy shortly after the ruling.
After all the drama, Perry ultimately did not follow through with the sale of the convent.
‘Dark Horse’ Copyright Lawsuit
In 2014, Christian hip-hop artist Flame (real name Marcus Gray) sued Perry for copyright infringement claiming that she plagiarized an eight-note riff off his 2008 song “Joyful Noise” on her 2014 track “Dark Horse.”
Five years later, the case went to trial. Perry testified in court and volunteered to sing the song live while the lawyers had technical difficulties getting the music to play for the jury. Producer Dr. Luke, who worked with Perry on the track, also testified. Both Perry and Dr. Luke claimed that they had not heard Flame’s song and were not familiar with him before the lawsuit.
The jury found Perry liable for infringement. Perry and the other defendants were ordered to pay Flame $2.78 million. Perry appealed the decision and got a legal victory in 2020. A judge overturned the verdict, ruling that the eight-note “ostinato” Perry allegedly copied lacked the “quantum of originality” to warrant copyright protection. Flame appealed the new decision but a federal appeals court ruled in Perry’s favor in 2022.
Katy Perry vs. Katie Perry
Australian designer Katie Perry, who also goes by her married name Katie Taylor, sued the singer for trademark infringement in 2019. Taylor, who began selling clothes under her birth name in 2007, claimed that Perry’s tour merchandise infringed a trademark the fashion designer owned.
Perry had previously tried to get the trademark on the pair’s shared moniker thrown out but it was dismissed by a judge. In 2023, Perry lost the trademark battle after a judge ruled in favor of Taylor.
Katy Perry and Orlando Bloom’s House Lawsuit
The pair were sued by the previous owner of their Montecito abode. Carl Wescott, an elderly veteran and businessman, sold the property to Perry and Bloom in July 2020. However, he claimed three years later that he “lacked the mental capacity to understand the nature and probable consequences of the contract,” per court documents obtained by Us Weekly in August 2023.
In the filing, Westcott said he suffered from Huntington’s disease and claimed he was taking painkillers after back surgery several days prior to the sale. He stated that he “was of unsound mind and not competent to give his free, voluntary, or intelligent consent to the contract.” After realizing he did not want to sell his home, Wescott got in touch with Berkshire Hathaway, who acted as a dual agent for seller and buyer, to explain the situation. He shared that he did not want to sell his home and apologized for the confusion.
Westcott allegedly received a letter from Perry and Bloom telling him “how much they liked the home and wanted to purchase it.” The veteran replied saying he was “in the final few years of his life and he cannot sell his home.” Perry and Bloom’s attorneys allegedly sent Westcott a letter stating that the couple was “not willing to walk away” from the sale and that he was “obligated to complete the sale.”
In November 2023, a judge ruled that Westcott did not meet his burden of proving he was mentally unfit at the time of the sale.
‘Lifetimes’ Music Video Investigation
Perry filmed the music video for her song, “Lifetimes,” in Ibiza and throughout Spain’s Balearic Islands. After the video dropped in August 2024, an investigation was launched for potential environmental damage,
The Balearic Islands’ Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Natural Environment claimed that the production company “had not requested authorization” for filming, per a press release. The environmental body also received “numerous information” about “alleged violations” committed by the production company while filming at the protected sand dunes of S’Espalmador.
Perry has yet to address the allegations.
