Skip to main contentSkip to footer
Elton John lors d'une Soiree Cartier a Gstaad© GettyImages

Elton John and his ex-wife settle the lawsuit caused by the release of ‘Rocketman’

The lawsuit referred to five scenes in the film, including scenes from the wedding, the description of their sleeping arrangements, and a therapy session in the movie.


Daniel Neira
Daniel Neira - Los Angeles
Senior WriterLos Angeles
OCTOBER 15, 2020 5:06 PM EDT

Sir Elton John and his ex-wife Renate Blauel have finally resolved a legal dispute that was caused after the release of the Rocketman biopic and the singer’s autobiography.

The couple had a four-year marriage and divorced in 1988, agreeing to follow a series of specific legal arrangements following the separation, however both the book and the acclaimed movie featuring Taron Egerton and Bryce Dallas Howard, discussed some of the topics that were supposed to be kept private between the star and Blauel.

The disruption of the agreement was followed by a lawsuit where Elton’s ex-wife claimed he had broken the terms of their divorce deal, and asked for £3m in damages, including “depression and anxiety,” as well as to prevent future disclosures of the same kind.

Rocketman Photocall   The 72nd Annual Cannes Film Festival© GettyImages

The lawsuit specifically referred to five scenes in the movie, including scenes from the wedding, the description of their sleeping arrangements, and a therapy session that showed a young Elton discussing his “unhappiness and in particular his sexuality” in connection to his marriage.

The singer’s legal team argued that everything that appeared on Rocketman and the autobiography was already known as public knowledge and none of the “private and confidential matters” of the relationship were being portrayed.

The case seems to be resolved amicably, now that a recent statement has been released “in a way that acknowledges Renate’s need for privacy,” adding that they will not be “discussing each other, or their marriage, in future and will be making no further comment about the case.”