Celine Dion feels "betrayed" after she was ordered to pay commission to her former agents.
The 'My Heart Will Go On' hitmaker has been left unimpressed by the California Labour Commission's ruling that she must pay ICM Partners and partner Rob Prinz a share of the money she received for her 2017 concert deal with AEG, which was reportedly worth close to $500 million and accused the company - who took legal action last year - of taking advantage following the 2016 death of her husband and manager, Renee Angelil.
According to Deadline, the ruling states the company is due 1.5% of the gross compensation earned or received from all Las Vegas residency performances, 3% of all touring performances and 1.5% from performances in her home province of Quebec. It also calculated interest at 10% per annum, however, the commission declared that Rob was not entitled to a share of Celine's $5 million sign-on bonus.
Celine said in a statement: "I have paid Mr. Prinz many millions of dollars over the years. And when this all started, my team made an extremely generous offer to pay him and ICM many more millions for years to come, even though our old agreements were over and we had not made a new one.
"I’m not saying that Mr. Prinz did not do anything, but he’s taking much more credit for my career than he deserves. Mr. Prinz had never asked to be paid for 10 years for a few months’ work, and I never agreed to it.
"When Rene was alive, he took care of my business and was always very fair with the people we worked with, and he taught me to be the same. Because he wasn’t here to stand up for me at the hearing, I feel like Mr. Prinz and ICM took advantage with their demands for money and revealing confidential information about my AEG deal. I feel betrayed.”
The 52-year-old star's legal team have confirmed they will appeal the ruling.
Her attorney, Zia Modabber, said: “With due respect to the Labor Commissioner’s office, we think they just got it wrong. The decision imposes on Celine a common agent’s agreement that she and Mr. Prinz abandoned decades before.
"Forcing that old arrangement on her now as if she were a new artist–rather than an international superstar–ignores the history of their later contracts and wildly overpays Mr. Prinz for his contribution.
"“Given their long history of much more limited contracts, if Mr. Prinz wanted to go back to their original agency agreement, he could have asked for it and there would have been some agreement, or not. We will appeal this decision and have a jury decide what is right."