Sir Elton John did try to have children with ex-wife Renate Blauel, despite claims in his memoir that he did not want to be a parent until he met his husband David Furnish, according to new court documents.
In High Court papers seen by MailOnline, it is claimed the Rocketman star did try to have children with Ms Blauel, but the pair struggled to conceive.
The claims appear to go against Sir Elton’s suggestion in his 2019 autobiography, entitled ‘Me’, in which he said he did not want to become a parent until he met Canadian filmmaker Furnish – whom he entered into a civil partnership with in 2005 and married in 2014.
The pair have two sons, called Elijah and Zachary, who were born by a surrogate.
The papers come as part of Ms Blauel’s lawsuit against Sir Elton, in which she claims attempts to ‘shed her public identity’ after their divorce have been ruined. She is suing the singer for £3million in damages.
Ms Blauel, who was married to Sir Elton between 1984 and 1988, claims the singer made ‘repeated and flagrant breaches’ of an agreement which promised that neither party would discuss their marriage publicly.
Ms Blauel, 67, claims she has tried to fade away from public attention – going as far as to change her name by deed poll and relocating within the UK.
But in the papers she claims the 73-year-old’s mention of her in the book, in which he talks positively of her, has thrown her back into spotlight – causing ‘recurring nightmares and agoraphobia’.
She also cites scenes from 2019 biopic Rocketman and a post to Instagram by Sir Elton in 2017 as an alleged breach.
In the post, he shared an image of himself and Mr Furnish and wrote: ‘I’m so excited to be back in Australia for a series of shows.
‘Many years ago, I chose Australia for my wedding to a wonderful woman for whom I have so much love and admiration.
‘I wanted more than anything to be a good husband, but I denied who I really was, which caused my wife sadness, and caused me huge guilt and regret.
‘To be worthy of someone’s love, you have to be brave enough and clear eyed enough to be honest with yourself and your partner.’
In defence papers, Sir Elton’s legal team denies breaching the agreement and said he was not aware of the mental health issues, while a friend today told the Sun: ‘He very much hopes she will see sense and drop this case.’
Ms Blauel, a German-born sound engineer who met the singer in 1983 through work, is claiming damages of potentially £3million and an injunction to restrain further commenting on her or the marriage.
Meanwhile her barrister Adam Wolanski QC has written in court documents that the publications caused her mental harm.
‘She has, since the release of the film, suffered recurring nightmares, agoraphobia, anxiety, depression, fear, and has had to relive her past constantly,’ it says in the court documents.
‘The publication of the memoir exacerbated these symptoms. She has needed, and will continue to need, medical intervention and therapy.’
On the matter of children, the 20 page document said: ‘The claimant (Ms Blauel) and the defendant (Sir Elton) did attempt to have children during their relationship but were unable to do so.’
Sir Elton and German-born Ms Blauel met in 1983 while the star was finishing his Too Low for Zero album, which included the hit singles ‘I’m Still Standing’ and ‘I Guess That’s Why They Call It The Blues’.
They were married at a star-studded ceremony in Sydney, Australia, in February 1984, but divorced four years later.
‘After her separation from the defendant, the claimant wanted to live as privately as possible and, in pursuance of this objective, to shed her identity as the defendant’s former wife,’ the court documents say.
She bought a new home in a friend’s name, hid her identity from removal men and told most people she knew she was leaving the country, when she was in fact staying in the UK and changing her identity.
Of the new friends she made after the house move in spring 2001, she only told three that she had been married to Sir Elton.
Ms Blauel had also changed her name by deed poll to distance herself from the marriage.
She has since changed it back in order to sue him, but plans to revert to her other name after the case is concluded, says the barrister.
In the court documents it said Ms Blauel had ‘repeatedly requested’ Sir Elton adhered to the spirit of the agreement, which states that the former couple will never ‘discuss the marriage or the reasons for the separation, save under terms of confidentiality within their own immediate families and in privileged circumstances with professional advisers.’
The documents add Ms Blauel had been ‘largely successful’ in her attempts to hide her identity, was living ‘quietly and privately’ and would have ‘expected that she would continue to for the rest of her life’.
They say comments referring to Ms Blauel and their marriage on Instagram and in the autobiography breached the terms of the divorce agreement.
The documents state Ms Blauel was only shown certain passages of the book and when she asked for sections of these passages to be removed completely, she was refused.
Amendments to the sections were made, however.
The document stated that Sir Elton’s responses to the complaints made by Ms Blauel were ‘dismissive and disingenuous’ and he ‘treated the Claimant [Ms Blauel] as unworthy of respect and rejected her concerns’.
It also alleges that Sir Elton showed a ‘cynical disregard’ for Ms Blauel’s feelings.
Scenes in the ‘Rocketman’ movie revolving around their relationship were also breaches, she claims.
The book and film were both hugely successful, the documents state, resulting in widespread interest in Ms Blauel and the marriage.
She had since become the subject of ‘widespread press scrutiny and discussion,’ causing her psychological damage.
But in defence papers, Sir Elton’s barrister Colin West QC wrote that the the singer denies breaching the terms of the divorce agreement or knowing she was susceptible to mental health issues.
She had not complained when he spoke about their marriage in the past and correspondence between them since their divorce had previously been ‘warm and friendly.’
The clause in the divorce agreement could only have been intended to prevent discussion of confidential matters, not common knowledge like Sir Elton’s sexuality, says the barrister.
‘Given the fact that the defendant is gay has entered the public domain without any breach of the agreement, the reasons for separation have to that extent also entered the public domain without any breach of the agreement and have thereby lost any confidential character they might otherwise have had,’ the defence documents say.
They also say they sought to contact Ms Blauel ahead of the film’s release via a recent email address and through a firm of solicitors known to have acted for her.
‘None of the disclosures about which the claimant complains concern matters which are in fact – or are any longer – private and confidential.’
Mr West denies that Sir Elton had any day to day involvement in the movie, while changes to the book were made after taking comments from Ms Blauel.
The Your Song singer married Renate Blauel in 1984, but they split up in 1988, in a divorce that is thought to have ended with Ms Blauel leaving with a settlement of between £5million and £10million.
According to The Sun, Ms Blauel, sought an injunction over the release of the acclaimed 2019 biopic, Rocketman.
Court papers claim Sir Elton had agreed to remove parts of his autobiography before it was published last year.
However in one part of Me, he expressed regret at ‘breaking the heart,’ of his ex-wife.
A source told The Sun: ‘Elton is shocked and saddened by Renate’s claim, especially as he has only ever praised her publicly.’
Another added: ‘He has always had a very pleasant relationship with Renate, respects her enormously and would never have said anything revealing about their marriage.’
In 2005 Sir Elton entered a civil partnership with David Furnish, the couple were formally married in 2014, when same-sex marriage became legal in England and Wales.
Ms Blauel moved to Germany in 2001 having sold up in Surrey, and she is also understood to have bought a town house in London with her new partner. But other than that, she has simply gone to ground. Until now.
The friend explains her thinking behind this new legal move: ‘She didn’t see the book before publication. She got wind of it and said: ‘Make sure, please, that I am not in it’. She didn’t want to be made to look a fool.
‘As far as I am aware she sent warnings about the book. Maybe they never got shown to Elton, but the book came out and she was in it, and so here we are.’