Katy Perry And Orlando Bloom Have A Long History Of Legal Troubles

Pop icon Katy Perry and actor Orlando Bloom are undeniably one of the hottest celeb couples in Hollywood, but their relationship isn't your typical love story. The stars initially met back in 2016 and soon after entered into an on-and-off-again relationship that led to a mutual separation between 2017 and 2018. After reuniting one year later, the pair announced their engagement in 2019 and welcomed their daughter, Daisy Dove, into the world. Today, 39-year-old Perry and 47-year-old Bloom have a surprisingly normal relationship, but it still hasn't exactly been smooth-sailing. These A-list celebs have been embroiled in several legal battles over the years, involving everything from past DUI scandals, copyright infringements, and, more recently, real estate drama.

Despite their legal troubles, Perry and Bloom's relationship persists — a rarity among high-ranking celebrities. Although there have been rumors that their relationship has been on the rocks, two partners who can pull through a string of drawn-out legal disputes without completely falling apart are clearly in it for the long run. Of course, that doesn't make the following list of lawsuits any less ridiculous. 

In July of 2020, Katy Perry and Orlando Bloom purchased an eight-bedroom mansion in Montecito, California for a whopping $15 million. The "Firework" singer and her fiancé scooped up the 1930s estate from American entrepreneur Carl Westcott who, after finalizing the deal, decided he no longer wished to sell the property. According to Us Weekly, the Texan native claimed "that he lacked the mental capacity to understand the nature and probable consequences of the contract" due to health issues. In response to Westcott's sudden change of mind, the newly engaged couple and their business manager, Bernie Gudvi, opted to take the man to court.

Westcott was 81-years-old at the time and had been diagnosed with Huntington's disease, a neurodegenerative disorder that causes physical and mental difficulties. Westcott had been taking multiple painkiller medications when he made the sale on July 15, as he had undergone a back operation just five days prior. What's worse, he was unable to attend the trial, as he was admitted to a mental health facility in 2021 after attempting suicide. He struggled with memory loss symptoms and, as of 2023, was being treated for dementia. 

Nevertheless, Perry was intent on keeping the Montecito estate and hoped to raise her daughter there alongside the "Kingdom of Heaven" actor. The trial began in September 2023 and ended in November of the same year. The court found Wescott mentally fit at the time of the sale and decided in Perry's favor.

The Montecito lawsuit was certainly a dramatic affair, but being sued by nuns is much more scandalous. In fact, the "Teenage Dream" singer was embroiled in a lawsuit against a group of Los Angeles Catholic nuns for almost three years. In 2015, the Sisters of the Most Holy and Immaculate Heart of the Blessed Virgin Mary sued the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Los Angeles to prevent the artist from buying a Mediterranean-style property in Hollywood, California.

The nuns tried to sell the former convent to Dana Hollister, a restaurateur-hotelier, but Archbishop Jose H. Gomez opted to sell it to Perry instead. "Well, I found Katy Perry, and I found her videos and if it's all right to say, I wasn't happy with any of it," Sister Catherine Rose Holzman wrote to the Archdiocese of Los Angeles, per The New York Times. "In selling to Katy Perry, we feel we are being forced to violate our canonical vows to the Catholic Church." Similarly, in 2015, Sister Holzman told Billboard that "Katy Perry represents everything we don't believe in. It would be a sin to sell to her."

Although the court ruled in Perry's favor, she required the Vatican's approval to finalize the sale. During the trial, Sister Holzman collapsed and subsequently passed away. Additionally, Hollister was made to pay both the archdiocese and Perry for interfering in the sale. In the end, Perry chose not to go through with the purchase.

The "Pirates of the Caribbean" actor's legal history is far less dramatic than one would assume for an actor who rose to fame in his early 20s. There was one incident involving Justin Bieber back in 2014 when Bloom tried and failed to land a punch on Bieber after the singer made an inappropriate comment about Bloom's ex, Miranda Kerr. Apart from Bloom's frankly embarrassing squabble with the then 20-year-old pop star, he managed to stay lawsuit-free for much of his early career. However, the British actor did get into trouble with the law in 2007 when he crashed his car during a wild night out.

The actor was spotted leaving a club in Los Angeles accompanied by two women, and at around 2:15 a.m., he rammed into two parked cars while being chased down by paparazzi. Thankfully, there were no passengers in either of the parked cars, but the 30-year-old and 35-year-old female passengers both sustained neck injuries. Los Angeles officials dropped the hit-and-run charges two weeks later as he wasn't speeding, nor was alcohol found to be involved.

Katy Perry found herself at the center of another religious conflict in 2014 when a Christian rap artist claimed Perry copied their song "Joyful Noise" to make the 2013 hit track "Dark Horse." Marcus Gray — who goes by the stage name Flame — and his two co-authors sued the pop star, as they claimed "Dark Horse" used the same beat and instrumentals. The "American Idol" judge stated that she had never listened to "Joyful Noise" and was unfamiliar with Flame.

The song "Dark Horse" was written by Perry and musician Lukasz Gottwald (Dr. Luke), who made his own statement to back Perry. "They're trying to own basic building blocks of music, the alphabet of music that should be available to everyone," Perry's lawyer, Christine Lepera, had argued (via CBC). Gray's attorney, Michael A. Kahn, countered with his own closing argument and said, "They're trying to shove Mr. Gray into some gospel music alleyway that no one ever visits" (via CBC).

The initial verdict supported Gray, so Perry was made liable for copyright infringement and was ordered to pay $2.78 million. However, the "California Gurls" successfully appealed the decision in 2020 and the judge overturned the verdict. Gray then tried to appeal this new decision in 2022, but he was unsuccessful.

Although the "Wide Awake" artist has been quite lucky with the outcomes of her major legal scuffles, Katy Perry has also had her fair share of unfortunate rulings. The Katy Perry v. Katie Perry case is one example of the singer's less fortunate court experiences. This battle stems back to Katy Perry's early days as an artist, when "I Kissed a Girl" topped the charts in 2008. That same year, Australian fashion designer Katie Taylor trademarked the brand name "Katie Perry," which she'd already been using since 2007.

According to the clothing designer's website, the conflict began in 2009 when she received a letter from Katy Perry's lawyer. "They stated that I should immediately stop trading under this name, withdraw all my clothes and sign a document drafted by them to say that from then on I will never trade under this name ever again," designer Katie Perry wrote on her website's blog. The designer bit back, suing Katy Perry for trademark infringement after the singer sold tour merchandise on her 2014 Australian tour. She also sued the "E.T." artist for merchandise sold to promote her "Prism" album and a Christmas song. The judge agreed that Perry infringed on the designer's trademark by advertising merchandise for her album "Roar" on social media but denied her other claims. The singer's company, Kitty Purry, was ordered to pay damages.