Due to the Welsh Rugby Union (WRU) taking control of the organization and placing it under administration, Cardiff head coach Matt Sherratt hopes his side won’t lose players.
Following the takeover, the WRU resisted being given all contracts at Cardiff.
Players may choose to move on, however, in some circumstances where their agreements are voided to be void as a result of the region’s collapse into administration.
On Monday, Cardiff players were required to sign contracts to ensure that their contracts were changed in accordance with current employment laws.
The first reason is that I believe the players here are content. I’ve made Cardiff a friendly place to play rugby in.
“I want players who have a history and a connection to the club and the city.”
“Hopefully everyone has a bond, so that keeps them anyway.
Adams’ signing shows Cardiff are staying, not elsewhere.
Picture agency for Huw Evans
Josh Adams, the Wales wing, signed a new two-year deal this week, indicating his intentions.
Sherratt said, “To keep someone with 60 caps and the distinction of being a British and Irish Lion was a club statement.”
It reaffirms our commitment to this country after the past ten days.
Adams claims that despite his disapproval, Cardiff’s plight continued to persuade him to stay.
According to Adams, “my contract was signed before everything (administration and the WRU takeover)” was done.
There was nothing to worry about on my end when I signed and transferred the contract.
Adams claims the squad was surprised by the severity of the news about Cardiff’s financial situation.
The group handled it well, Adams said, “but it was shock news when I first heard.”
“The players were very quickly from beginning to end, from receiving the news to being taken over.”
I have to express how well the WRU and Cardiff boards handled that and dissipated any doubts or doubts in players’ minds.
“They have to have a backlash for their diligence and putting players and staff first,” he said.
Along with club captain Liam Belcher and representatives from the Welsh Rugby Players Association (WRPA), Corey Domachowski and Callum Sheedy, Adams was one of four senior players who assisted in relaying messages to other players.
“We have cracked on with things, and it hasn’t changed anything in our day-to-day things,” Adams said.
Teams could see it as something that can energize the group, the team said.
Not something I want to repeat, I thought.
After Warren Gatland resigned during the Six Nations, Sherratt has endured an eventful couple of months.
Sherratt remarked, “It’s just nice to be coaching.”
You simply interpret it as experience. I enjoy the Wales experience and the coaching here.
“You get through it, I didn’t love the last ten days, and you can work hard on the pitch, not in the meeting room.
I’d like to not repeat the ten days, but I’m hoping we can now focus on rugby.
Both teams are vying for top eight play-off spots in the United Rugby Championship (URC) when Cardiff face Ospreys on Saturday at Judgement Day at the Principality Stadium.
Sherratt remarked that it was trying to pass the players last week.
We made an effort to provide clarity to the participants during the meeting about the WRU takeover. We discussed what kind of ending we had five minutes later.
“We have one of our closest rivals in the best rugby stadium in the world.”
You’ve seen over the past two seasons when the club needed their supporters, they have come out en masse when Munster is at home on a Friday night.
Ospreys and Cardiff “stand together”
Picture agency for Huw Evans
Mark Jones, the head coach for Ospreys, claims that his side backs their Cardiff rivals.
We feel for those who have been impacted, according to Jones.
“It’s not the management group’s fault,” the statement read.
They have simply been carrying out their duties. These things are above that level, and sadly, players are the ones who are currently experiencing the effects.
It has a variety of effects on different people. When they come together, rally, and support one another, it might have a positive impact on them.
However, it might also cause people to focus on themselves and be more concerned with the larger picture.
Jones speaks from personal experience, having gone through the same procedure at Worcester’s backroom staff.
Worcester recently announced that they would return next season, despite the English club’s collapse in 2022.
Because I’ve endured it at Worcester, I’m certain that it will have an impact on them (Cardiff) in some way.
“The Worcester players were awesome at putting it to a stand.” Some of us were unpaid, others were uncontracted, and we were still getting paid.
“You had staff doing it exactly, not just players,” the statement read.
The United Kingdom’s Supreme Court has ruled that the terms “woman” and “sex” refer to a “biological woman and biological sex” under UK equality laws, bringing a long-running court battle between feminist groups and the government of Scotland to an end.
Wednesday’s ruling is expected to have far-reaching consequences for policies on whether and how spaces and services reserved for women should be extended to include “trans women” – those born male who have transitioned socially or medically or who identify as women – such as changing rooms, domestic violence shelters and medical services.
Although the case originally began in Scotland, the court’s interpretation of the law will be effective across the UK, including in England and Wales.
Reactions towards the ruling have been mixed: Feminist advocacy groups involved in the legal case have voiced satisfaction, while trans groups and some members of the Scottish government expressed disappointment and fear about future discrimination.
Here’s what we know about the Supreme Court’s ruling and how the case started:
Marion Calder and Susan Smith from For Women Scotland celebrate outside the Supreme Court to challenge gender recognition laws, in London, UK, Wednesday, April 16, 2025 [Kin Cheung/AP]
What was the case about and how did it start?
The legal dispute began in March 2018 when the Scottish Parliament passed an act stating that 50 percent of non-executive members of the boards of Scottish public bodies must be women.
The act, which is known as Holyrood’s Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Act 2018, was supposed to ensure better representation for women in public bodies.
A sticking point in the policy, however, was the definition of “woman”. The act itself said that “women” included transgender women who held gender recognition certificates (GRCs) – that is, trans women who have legally transitioned and are certified by the government as having changed their gender.
A feminist group, For Women Scotland (FWS), challenged the new law and launched a petition against it in 2018. The group argued that the Scottish parliament had wrongfully defined “woman” and that the law had failed to use legal definitions as set out in the UK Equality Act of 2010.
That Act prohibits discrimination based on age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage or civil partnership (in cases of employment), pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, and sexual orientation.
However, the UK Equality Act 2010 does allow for separate or single-sex services to be provided when this is reasonably necessary, such as for reasons of privacy, decency or preventing trauma.
A Scottish court dismissed the first case brought by FWS in 2022, concluding that the Scottish legislation did not necessarily redefine “woman” by including transgender women. The judge ruled that women were “not limited to biological or birth sex”.
FWS launched an unsuccessful appeal in 2023. The case was then heard at the Scottish Court of Session several times as the group sought to clarify how to correctly interpret the term “woman” as enshrined in the Equality Act.
In March 2024, the advocacy group, backed by other feminist organisations and lesbian groups, appealed to the Supreme Court. The group was also supported by Harry Potter author and women’s rights campaigner JK Rowling, who reportedly donated 70,000 pounds ($92,000) to a crowdfunding campaign by FWS.
The rainbow flag, bottom right, a symbol of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community, flies alongside the UK, left, and the Scottish flags over the UK government’s Scotland Office building, in central London, Friday, March 28, 2014 [Lefteris Pitarakis/AP]
What did the Supreme Court decide, and how does the UK law define ‘woman’?
On Wednesday, five judges ruled unanimously that the term “woman” in the existing UK Equality Act should be interpreted as only people born biologically female, and that trans women, even those with GRCs, should be excluded from that definition.
The ruling further clarified, therefore, that trans women can be excluded from certain single-sex spaces and groups designated for women, such as changing rooms, homeless and domestic violence shelters, swimming areas and medical or counselling services.
“Interpreting ‘sex’ as certificated sex would cut across the definitions of ‘man’ and ‘woman’ … and, thus, the protected characteristic of sex, in an incoherent way,” Justice Patrick Hodge said while summarising the case. “It would create heterogeneous groupings.”
The court added that the ruling was not a “triumph” of one side over the other, and emphasised that transgender people are still protected from discrimination under UK law. However, some protections, the judges clarified, should only apply to biological females and not transgender women.
Transgender rights supporters protest in favour of Scottish gender reform bill outside Downing Street in London, UK, January 17, 2023 [Henry Nicholls/Reuters]
What are the broader implications?
Until now, trans women with GRCs could be counted as women for the purpose of all-women shortlists for political parties or to fill quotas for women on boards or within organisations. This will no longer be the case.
In the 20 years since the Gender Recognition Act was passed in the UK, nearly 8,500 GRCs have been issued.
The Gender Recognition Panel received 1,397 applications for GRCs in 2023-2024 – a record number. Of those, 1,088 were granted. This was triple the number of applications in 2020-2021, after which the application fee dropped from 140 to 5 pounds ($180 to $7).
The ruling provides some clarification on an issue that has proved polarising not only in the UK but also in the United States.
Debates have raged in both countries, as well as in other Western nations, on whether certain women’s rights, services or spaces should be extended to trans women. US President Donald Trump is facing legal challenges for signing orders to define sex as only male or female. Trump has also tried to ban transgender people from entering the military and block trans people from participating in sports teams that do not align with their biological sex.
It’s unclear how the ruling could affect sport in the UK, but trans women may now be restricted, if not excluded, from women’s categories. There’s no nationwide rule on how different sport organisations should include transgender people. Presently, the English Football Association allows trans women to compete in the women category if their testosterone levels are below five nanomoles per litre for at least 12 months. Women typically have 2.5 nanomoles per litre. On the other hand, British Cycling bans trans women from women’s competitions altogether.
Rules regarding how domestic violence centres run may also be reassessed. In 2021, RISE, a shelter for women in Brighton, lost 5 million pounds ($6.2m) in local government funding after an assessment found that it did not provide services to trans women. The organisation said it was forced to close its refuge services for women, but was able to continue providing services like therapy.
What are the arguments for and against the inclusion of trans women as women?
Groups like FWS argue that biological sex cannot be changed and that the rights of transgender people should not come at the expense of women. Allowing trans women to be included in the definition of women would reduce protection for people born female, they argue.
Previously, FWS director Triba Budge argued that the Scottish Act at the root of the legal case could be interpreted to mean that public boards could legally consist of “50 percent men and 50 percent men with certificates” – referring to trans women holding GRCs – therefore excluding biological women altogether.
On the other hand, trans rights groups say they require the same protections as women. The ruling on Wednesday excludes transgender people from sex discrimination protections and conflicts with human rights laws, they argue.
The Supreme Court’s decision would also undermine protections for trans people covered in the UK’s 2004 Gender Recognition Act, opponents said. The law allows trans people to obtain a GRC and update the sex recorded on their birth certificate accordingly, but trans groups say that recognition could now be undermined.
Some believe the ruling will lead to more attacks on trans people. Rights and hate monitoring groups note that the average trans person is more likely than others to face discrimination and physical, sexual, or verbal harassment.
Stop Hate UK, which monitors attacks on minority groups in the country, reports that the UK police recorded 2,630 hate crimes against transgender people in 2021. The group said that was a 16 percent increase from the previous year and that it was likely an undercount, as most trans people do not feel safe enough to report attacks.
Marion Calder, centre, and Susan Smith, left, from For Women Scotland, celebrate outside after the UK Supreme Court ruled that a woman is someone born biologically female, excluding transgender people from the legal definition in a long-running dispute between the feminist group and the Scottish government, in London, UK, Wednesday, April 16, 2025 [Kin Cheung/AP]
How have different groups reacted to the Supreme Court ruling?
FWS and other feminist groups that joined the organisation in the final Supreme Court case celebrated outside the court on Wednesday after the ruling was pronounced.
Supporters chanted “Women’s rights are human rights” and popped bottles of wine in celebration.
“Everyone knows what sex is and you can’t change it,” Susan Smith, who co-directs FWS, told The Associated Press news agency. “It’s common sense, basic common sense, and the fact that we have been down a rabbit hole where people have tried to deny science and to deny reality, and hopefully this will now see us back to reality.”
“We are delighted,” Sex Matters, another group involved in the court case, said in a statement on Wednesday. “The court has given us the right answer: The protected characteristic of sex – male and female – refers to reality, not to paperwork,” the statement read.
On the other hand, trans advocacy groups voiced disappointment.
“We are really shocked by today’s Supreme Court decision, which reverses 20 years of understanding on how the law recognises trans men and women with Gender Recognition Certificates,” Scottish Trans said in a statement.
The group also accused the court of hearing only from organisations on one side of the debate, and not from trans people. “We think their judgement reflects the fact that trans people’s voices were missing,” the statement read.
Maggie Chapman, a legislator of Scotland’s Green Party which has been at the forefront of championing trans rights, said the ruling was “deeply concerning” for human rights and “a huge blow to some of the most marginalised people in our society”.
“Trans people have been cynically targeted and demonised by politicians and large parts of the media for far too long. This has contributed to attacks on longstanding rights and attempts to erase their existence altogether,” Chapman added.
Meanwhile, the Scottish government said it would accept the ruling.
The Scottish Government accepts today’s Supreme Court judgement. The ruling gives clarity between two relevant pieces of legislation passed at Westminster. We will now engage on the implications of the ruling. Protecting the rights of all will underpin our actions.
In a statement posted on X, Scotland’s First Minister John Swinney said the law provided clarity and would be followed.
“We will now engage on the implications of the ruling. Protecting the rights of all will underpin our actions,” Swinney said.
The UK government said the law would clarify issues of service provision in hospitals, refuges, and sports clubs, although in what ways exactly is not yet clear.
“Single-sex spaces are protected in law and will always be protected by this government,” a spokesperson said.
What else is likely to change?
It is expected that government institutions across the UK will begin to make changes in line with the ruling.
One example of the ruling’s potential effect is the case of a Scottish health organisation which is being sued by a nurse it suspended over her objection to a trans woman using a female changing room. The organisation, NHS Fife, said it had noted the judgement.
“We will now take time to carefully consider the judgement and its implications,” a spokesperson said.
British Transport Police has already updated a controversial search policy from September 2024 that allowed transgender detainees with a GRC to be searched by officers of their acquired gender. That has now changed, spokesperson Daisy Collingwood told Al Jazeera.
“We have advised our officers that any same-sex searches in custody are to be undertaken in accordance with the biological birth sex of the detainee,” Collingwood said. “We are in the process of reviewing the implications of the ruling and will consider any necessary updates to our policies and practices in line with the law and national guidance.”
Meanwhile, legal experts say the ruling showed equality legislation might need to be urgently updated to ensure trans people are protected.
United States President Donald Trump has hinted at firing Federal Reserve chairman Jerome Powell amid the president’s frustration that the central bank will not aggressively cut interest rates.
On Thursday, Trump said that Powell’s “termination cannot come fast enough”.
Powell’s term does not expire until May 2026. The president does not have the authority to remove Powell from the central bank.
Trump’s attacks on Powell come after the Fed chair’s speech at the Economic Club of Chicago on Wednesday. Powell said the Fed would base its decisions solely on what is best for all Americans.
“That’s the only thing we’re ever going to do,” Powell said. “We’re never going to be influenced by any political pressure. People can say whatever they want. That’s fine, that’s not a problem. But we will do what we do strictly without consideration of political or any other extraneous factors.
“Our independence is a matter of law,” Powell continued. “We’re not removable except for cause. We serve very long terms, seemingly endless terms.”
The Republican president’s broadside comes a day after Powell signalled that the Fed would keep its key interest rate unchanged, while it seeks “greater clarity” on the effect of policy changes in areas such as immigration, taxation, regulation and tariffs.
Powell also reiterated that Trump’s tariffs would likely raise inflation and slow the economy, which could make it harder for the Fed to cut rates anytime soon. The Fed chair suggested that the central bank would focus on fighting inflation in the wake of the tariffs, even if the duties did weaken the economy. Powell’s comments contributed to a drop in stock prices on Wednesday.
Trump pushes back
Pushing back on Powell, Trump in a social media post said, “Oil prices are down, groceries (even eggs!) are down, and the USA is getting RICH ON TARIFFS.”
On the contrary, oil prices have risen 2 percent in the last two weeks. Grocery prices have actually increased under Trump, according to the most recent consumer price index report in April, and egg prices hit record highs last month as per the same report. Last week, the president falsely claimed the US brought in $2bn a day thanks to tariffs – it was $200m a day.
Referring to the European Central Bank (ECB), Trump added that Powell “should have lowered Interest Rates, like the ECB, long ago, but he should certainly lower them now. Powell’s termination cannot come fast enough!”
The ECB on Thursday lowered its key interest rate from 2.5 percent to 2.25 percent.
Powell was initially nominated by Trump in 2017 and was appointed to another four-year term by former President Joe Biden in 2022. At a November news conference, Powell indicated he would not step down if Trump asked him to resign, pointing out that removal or demotion of top Fed officials was “not permitted under the law”.
Trump’s comments come with the backdrop of a legal case at the Supreme Court that could determine whether presidents can fire the heads of independent agencies such as the Fed.
The case stems from Trump’s firings of officials from two independent agencies. The Supreme Court last week let the firings stand while it considers the case. It could issue a broader ruling this summer that would enable the president to fire Fed officials, including the chair.
Powell said the Fed is watching the case closely, adding it might not apply to the Fed. Lawyers for the Trump administration have argued that allowing the president to fire the two officials wouldn’t erode the Fed’s independence.
“It is difficult to overstate the consequences at this stressed moment of a Court ruling that found that President Trump … does have the authority to dismiss the heads of independent agencies and did not establish a clear carve-out for the Fed,” Krishna Guha, an analyst at investment bank Evercore ISI, wrote on Thursday. “If you liked the tariff debacle in markets, you’d love the loss-of-Fed-independence trade.”
Tariff mayhem
Powell started Trump’s second term in a relatively secure spot with a low unemployment rate and inflation progressing closer to the Fed’s 2 percent target, conditions that could have spared the US central banker from the president’s vitriol.
But Trump’s aggressive and haphazard tariffs have raised the threat of a recession with both higher inflationary pressures and slower growth, a tough spot for Powell, whose mandate is to stabilise prices and maximise employment. With the economy weakening because of Trump’s choices, the president appears to be looking to pin the blame on Powell.
Trump has unleashed a rash of tariffs that have put the US economy and the Fed in an increasingly perilous spot.
On April 2, the president rolled out aggressive tariff hikes based on US trade deficits with other nations, causing a financial market backlash that almost immediately led him to announce a 90-day pause in which most countries would be charged a baseline 10 percent tariff while negotiations go forward. But Trump increased his tariff hikes on China to a rate of 145 percent in addition to his existing tariffs on Canada, Mexico, autos and steel and aluminium.
Wall Street banks such as Goldman Sachs have raised their odds that a recession could start. Consumers are increasingly pessimistic in surveys about their job prospects and fearful that inflation would shoot up as the cost of the import taxes get passed along to them. The risk of stagflation – stagnant growth and high inflation – would make it harder for the Fed to respond with the same playbook as recent downturns.
As a whole new host of fresh-faced candidates compete for Lord Alan Sugar’s investment, The Mirror takes a look back at what happened to every winner of The Apprentice
The Apprentice Season 19 is coming to end, but what are the previous champs doing now?(Image: PA)
Some of the previous winners of The Apprentice have gone on to do big things, even making millions, while others have fallen into financial turmoil, leaving them skint.
The latest season has been back on our screens for weeks now, showcasing a new batch of ambitious participants eager to secure the top prize, a £250,000 investment in their business ideas.
With the final episode approaching today, we’re taking a look back on previous winners – from those still thriving with Lord Alan Sugar’s backing, to those who’ve parted ways and seen their fortune take an unexpected turn.
READ MORE: The Apprentice fans convinced Alan Sugar has accidentally revealed 2025 winner early
Rachel Woolford – Series 18 (2024)
Reformer pilates studio owner Rachel Woolford won last year’s series(Image: PA)
Rachel Woolford won last year’s series after beating off stiff competition. Since the show, she has gone on to see big things for her stylish gym, which she launched in 2020. The partnership with Lord Sugar saw the business expand into a dedicated reformer pilates studio.
Article continues below
She told the Yorkshire Evening Post: “The studio is the perfect next step for us and reformer pilates is a safe bet if you’re already in the industry – there’s a big client base here in Leeds.”
She went on: “I’ve just become a landlord with Lord Sugar, which is the strangest feeling ever. He brought the capital to the table by financing the building, so I can get on with the day-to-day running of the business. Being in front of the clients is important to me. I’m very independent; I like managing on my own terms and that doesn’t need to change. But we still have a monthly meeting and, if I wanted to speak to him more, I could.”
Rachel also expressed that her stint on the show was the best thing she has ever done in her career.
Marnie Swindells – Series 17 (2023)
Marnie won series 17 last year(Image: PA)
She has a great relationship with Lord Sugar(Image: PA)
London-born court advocate Marnie is a gold medal-winning boxer who snowballed her passion into an innovative business idea that she hoped would get Lord Sugar’s investment. After taking home the prize, she focused on investing the prize money into her passion. The star and businesswoman used the money to open her own boxing gym, Bronx, in south London.
Marnie got the keys to the site of her gym in 2019 but wasn’t able to start trading until February 2023 due to problems with the property lease and the council. The 6,000-square-foot gym is in the heart of Camberwell and includes a competition ring, punching bags, mirrored walls to “perfect shadowboxing”, and endless exercise equipment.
According to the financial accounts of Bronx Boxing Limited, Marnie has gained around £210,000 in net assets. As Marnie plans to further develop the gym, she’s set to earn even more money. She said she and Lord Sugar have a “great relationship”, adding: “He has a sharp sense for businesses he believes will do well and the people he wants to work with. I think once the glitz and glam of The Apprentice has subsided, he gets the true assessment of whether they are people he sees a long-term relationship with.”
However, while Marnie has had a significant financial gain from competing in the show, other areas in her life were affected by the show “If you’re just in the process – but especially if you win – heavy is the head that wears the crown, and I became very consumed. she said
“A lot of my personal relationships with family, romantically, all suffered because my focus became the show.
“And I’m glad it was because it’s paid off now,” she added
“And the people that love me enough survived that struggle with me and are here now to smell the roses with me.
Harpreet Kaur – Series 16 (2022)
Harpreet had an amicable split and bought Lord Sugar out of the business(Image: PA)
Dessert parlour owner Harpreet Kaur was the winner of season 16 and secured the investment in her dessert shop Barni’s, which was rebranded to Oh So Yum! One year after her win, Kaur went solo, and Lord Sugar announced the news on Twitter. He said: “Harpreet Kaur, The Apprentice winner 2022, has bought back Lord Sugar’s shares in her desserts business, Oh So Yum! This move marks a significant achievement in the journey of the Yorkshire-based entrepreneur, who won Season 16 of the show and secured a £250,000 investment from Lord Sugar.
“With the purchase of Lord Sugar’s shares, Harpreet and her sister, Gurvinder Kaur, are now in full control of the business and its future direction. The separation has been amicable and Lord Sugar and Harpreet Kaur mutually agreed it was the best decision for the business moving forward. Harpreet is an exceptionally bright and driven businesswoman. I’ve enjoyed our time working together, and whilst the time is right for us to now go our separate ways, I have no doubts she will continue to flourish. I look forward to seeing the Oh So Yum! brand go from strength to strength.”
Carina Lepore – Series 15 (2019)
Carina still runs Dough Bake House without Lord Sugar
In 2019, Lord Sugar invested £ 250,000 in Carina’s artisan bakery business. She planned to rival Greggs with her Dough Bake House chain, and business boomed a year later. In addition to her original bakery in Herne Hill, Carina opened a new branch in Beckenham in September 2020.
Lord Sugar himself opened the new family-run bakery and helped cut the ribbon to open the new store. “What attracted me to Carina as the winner is that this business has potential. Food will always be good,” said Lord Sugar on This Morning. “Greggs watch out, we’re going to have a lot of branches.”
But in 2023, they parted ways. A spokesperson said: “As part of an ongoing review of his business portfolio, Lord Sugar has decided to part ways with Carina Lepore, The Apprentice winner 2019 and founder of Dough Artisan Bakehouse. Both parties agreed it was the right decision for the business moving forward, and Carina will take back full control of her business with immediate effect.”
Sian Gabbidon – Series 14 (2018)
Sian parted ways with Lord Sugar in 2022 to live her ‘best life’(Image: PA)
Having come out on top in 2018, Sian ploughed the prize money straight back into her swimwear business, Sian Marie. After winning The Apprentice, she focused on building her team in Leeds and growing the company from small-scale to mass production. “It’s a big achievement and has been such a thrill. But you know, that’s just the start for us. It’s the first step,” said Sian in October 2019.
“The platform of being on the Apprentice is amazing. There’s no doubt that having somebody like Lord Sugar on board has opened doors for me. Having his knowledge and guidance on how to approach situations is a massive help.” Her SS19 Tropical Goddess collection was worn by actress Michelle Keegan and Love Island’s Hayley Hughes, and she also launched her own Apprentice-based podcast.
In 2019, Sian announced she was launching a swimwear collaboration with Asda, which amazingly is where she started her career working. In 2022, the duo parted ways. Sian said: “It was just a conversation… we kind of came to an agreement and now I’m just living my best life, I guess. Not in a negative way towards him but it’s just nice to have a bit more fun.”Then this year, she appeared in Forbes to promote her new e-commerce agency, Twenty Twenty Digital.
James White and Sarah Lynn – Series 13 (2017)
James and Sarah both won the show in 2017 and parted ways with Lord Sugar later(Image: PA)
Lord Sugar couldn’t decide on a winner in 2017, so he picked James White and Sarah Lynn as the winners. Admitting he had always been a gambler in business, Lord Sugar said: “This particular year, I’m going to double my investment… I’m going to start a business with both of you.”
He invested a combined £500,000 that year, with half going to James’ IT recruitment firm and the other half into Sarah’s confectionery company. During the process, James broke show rules by having a romance with fellow candidate Jade English, with a source close to the show claiming the pair got up to some ‘saucy antics’.
Following the fling, which cooled off before the series aired on TV, Jade reportedly split from her male model boyfriend after three years, while James separated from his heartbroken fiancée. Sarah’s personalised sweet company, Sweets in the City, has gone from strength to strength – being stocked in Harrods, Harvey Nichols and Selfridges – but she still parted ways with Lord Sugar in 2022.
But it was a rockier road for self-proclaimed ‘Del Boy’ James who was said to have suffered a series of ‘unfortunate setbacks’ and lost £30,000 in the first six months in his IT recruitment company, Right Time Recruitment. In December 2020, it was revealed that James and Lord Sugar had parted ways but The Apprentice boss was reportedly letting him keep the money he invested.
“I wish James all the very best for the future and will follow his progress with interest,” said Lord Sugar in a statement. James added, “I am very grateful for everything Lord Sugar has done for me. The knowledge and advice gained from Lord Sugar and his team have been invaluable.”
Alana Spencer – Series 12 (2016)
Alana Spencer won back in 2016 and bought Lord Sugar out(Image: PA)
Alana put the £250,000 into her baking business Ridiculously Rich, and set up an ambassador plan with Lord Sugar. She exclusively told Mirror TV her turnover went from £100,000 to an expected £450,000 in a year thanks to winning The Apprentice. The queen of cake bought back Lord Sugar’s shares and became the sole owner and director of the firm in 2019.
“A little while ago I had the amazing opportunity to buy out Lord Sugar from Ridiculously Rich and take full control back of my business,” she explained on social media. “It was an exciting, crazy, scary few months while the final details were being agreed and sorted, but something I am so grateful for.”
She added: “Working with Lord Sugar has been an incredible experience and I have learned such a lot in such a short space of time. I am so grateful for his time in Ridiculously Rich by Alana.” Wishing her luck, Lord Sugar said: “I will follow Alana’s progress with much affection.”
Joseph Valente – Series 11 (2015)
Joseph Valente won the show in 2015(Image: PA)
His business later went into voluntary liquidation(Image: Twitter/mrjosephvalente)
Joseph Valente split from Lord Sugar just two years after he invested £250,000 into his plumbing business and announced he would take full control of ImpraGas. But they parted on friendly terms, with Lord Sugar saying: “I’ll still be on hand to offer any help and advice required. I wish Joseph and ImpraGas all the very best for the future and will follow their progress with much affection.”
Joseph added: “I am so grateful for everything Lord Sugar has done for me and I could not have asked for a better partner in the early stages of my business career. I owe him a great deal. I am confident that with the winning business model we created together, I can continue to grow the business successfully.”
In the summer of 2020, he was forced to sell his boiler installation business amid reports it owed almost £2million to creditors. ImpraGas was sold for an undisclosed sum, safeguarding jobs, but shell company VBH Assets, co-owned by Joseph, entered into voluntary liquidation, owing £1.9million to creditors.
Joseph opened up on his battle with depression and public shaming after the failure of his company but said it made him even more determined. “It hit me very hard, I was very depressed for a couple of months, and one day I woke up and thought, ‘There is no way I am going to let this destroy me'”, Joseph told Mirror Online. “I had my credibility and my reputation to rebuild.”
He started from scratch, and his courses to support new and existing businesses in growing, Trade Mastermind and Power2Succeed, are going from strength to strength.
Mark Wright – Series 10 (2014)
The Apprentice 2014 winner Mark Wright has gone on to become very successful(Image: PA)
Australian-born Mark won a £250,000 investment from Lord Sugar in 2014, despite getting confused for the TOWIE star with the same name. He started his digital marketing agency, Climb Online, which has become the most successful company to have gained investment through the BBC show, bringing in £5million in its second year.
Away from business, Mark started dating another winner, Leah Totton, back in 2015, but they decided to keep the relationship quiet as they were nervous about what Lord Sugar would think. They struggled to keep their romance going while having incredibly busy work schedules, which made it almost impossible to be together.
They announced their split in October 2016 – with Mark explaining the reasons why it didn’t work out. Mark said: “We are both incredibly driven people and, due to our busy schedules, the relationship just wasn’t working, so we decided to go our separate ways. Leah is a lovely girl, and we remain good friends.” In August 2020, Mark officially became a UK citizen.
Leah Totton – Series Nine (2013)
The Apprentice winner Dr Leah Totton and Lord Sugar have made millions
Leah managed to see off stiff competition from Celebrity Big Brother star Luisa Zissman in 2013. The Irish GP used her £250,000 investment from Lord Sugar to open several cosmetic surgery clinics. The launch was controversial, with critics claiming it would encourage women to have more treatments, but Leah batted off the comments and her clinics have been a huge success.
She’s had a load of famous clients, including The Only Way Is Essex stars, and Karren Brady attended her launch event. Leah also worked part-time as a locum doctor in NHS A&E centre. Lord Sugar has visited the clinic many times – and Leah has joked she has offered him Botox many times but he “politely declines”.
Ricky Martin – Series Eight (2012)
Ricky Martin won the series in 2012 and went on to win numerous business awards(Image: PA)
Ricky Martin (no, not that one) was Livin’ La Dida Loca back in 2012 when he went into business with Shuggs. “I’m like a shark, right at the top of the food chain. I take what I want, when I want. I truly am the reflection of perfection,” boasted the former pro wrestler Ricky Martin on the show. He went on to win over Lord Sugar with his business plan for a specialist science recruitment company.
He is now the managing director of Essex-based business Hyper Recruitment Solutions, set up with the £250,000 investment winners now get. Qualified biochemist Ricky, who changed his name from Richard to emulate the pop star, and Lord Sugar each own half the business. He’s gone on to win numerous business awards, is earning several million pounds each year and is also dad to two kids with wife Gemma.
Tom Pellereau – Series Seven (2011)
Tom’s inventions triumphed and he went on to create lots of successful products
It seemed like Tom would be straight out the door after he was on the losing team five weeks in a row. Exasperated, Lord Sugar once barked at him: “If you nod your head any longer, I’m going to put you on the back seat of my bloody car.” But the inventor still triumphed and went into business with the tycoon developing Stylfile nail care products to be sold at Tesco and Asda supermarkets.
Their company made a turnover of £1.5million thanks to his winning S-shaped nail file. Since then, he’s also launched a new makeup brush-cleaning gadget, Stylpro and other time-saving beauty tech like gel nail polish remover clips and a baby-safe nail clipper. Tom, who admits he still gets “shouted at all the time” by Lord Sugar, also went on to develop a collapsible baby bottle and a bowel cancer screening device.
Stella English – Series Six (2010)
Lord Sugar and Stella English had a massive falling out(Image: PA)
The highs of winning the BBC series were soon followed by deep lows for Stella English, who was hired by Lord Sugar in 2010 in the final episode of that year’s series. Her success turned sour when she quit her £100,000 per year job with Lord Sugar, arguing she was used like an “overpaid lackey” and unsuccessfully attempting to sue her former boss.
Stella moaned that her role with Lord Alan Sugar’s computer company, Viglen, was nothing like she thought it would be and an insider said she felt like a “glorified PA”. A company spokesman confirmed that Stella would be switching companies to join web-connected TV service YouView, of which Lord Sugar was non-executive chairman.
But Stella didn’t enjoy her new role either and later claimed she felt pressured into taking the new position at Sugar’s internet set-top box company. Speaking on ITV’s Daybreak in September 2013, she explained: “Despite [the high salary] I couldn’t actually physically stay there, because it was unbearable. I had no future there, I knew that’s why I resigned.”
After resigning, Stella landed a £200,000-a-year consultant job with Citigroup, but things got ugly when Stella tried to sue Lord Sugar for constructive dismissal. In the March 2013 tribunal showdown, Stella claimed Lord Sugar told her that he “didn’t give a s***” if she left his company, but the panel decided her case “should never have been brought” and was “ill-advised”.
Following the case, the tycoon counter-sued his old employee, demanding that Stella pay for lawyers he employed during her failed constructive dismissal case against him – costs amounting to £50,000. “I do not know how I am going to feed my kids, never mind the mortgages,” she told the panel during the hearing.
Lord Sugar’s counterclaim failed as an East London Tribunal Service panel ruled that the mother-of-two should not have to repay any of the legal fees. Lord Sugar later accused her of aiming for a “tidy” out-of-court settlement, adding: “I’m afraid she underestimated me and her reputation is now in tatters.”
What happened next for Stella was an astonishing fall from grace as she went from the boardroom to the job centre, her marriage collapsed, and she had just £90 in the bank. “I wish I had never gone on The Apprentice. I’m broke and on my knees. I just don’t know how I’m going to carry on,” she told The Mirror in September 2013.
Stella struggled to find work at first but then appeared as a host for Crowd Box – a TV channel that helps entrepreneurs raise money through crowd-funding – and found work as a management consultant. Her love life also turned around as Stella found happiness with snooker player boyfriend Ali Carter in 2016, and they had a baby together in 2013 before splitting in 2019.
Yasmina Siadatan – Series Five (2009)
Yasmina Siadatan with her new boss after winning in 2009(Image: PA)
After becoming Lord Sugar’s Apprentice, Yasmina said: “I feel very lucky. Life is brilliant.” The steely brunette was tipped for greatness and immediately began working for Lord Sugar in a £100,000 a year deal. The restaurant owner worked at his Amscreen Healthcare company, which supplies advertising and information screens to hospitals and GPs.
The following year, she announced she was pregnant following a whirlwind romance with colleague Andrew Hepburn, going on maternity leave at Christmas 2010 and her first child was born the following month. She was due to return in January 2012, but told bosses she was expecting another baby.
After two years spent starting her family, Yasmina was “itching” to get back to work and was headhunted by Dragons’ Den star James Caan to be Head of Operations role in a Private Equity firm. “Once I had met various people in the organisation I was sold on the company as a whole, especially James himself, so it was just a case of them finding a role that would suit me,” said Yasmina.
“It wasn’t an advertised role but something that James matched my skills to, which is how a lot of people are brought into the company.” Yasmina then worked as creative director of Start Up Loans and as Head of Marketing at a fintech firm and also ran as a Conservative candidate for council for a by-election in Henley in March 2017.
Lee McQueen – Series Four (2008)
Lee had some memorable Apprentice moments
Charming Lee was renowned for his “That’s what I’m talking about!” catchphrase. The milkman’s son, who became owner of a million-pound company, rang in sick with food poisoning on what should have been his first day at Lord Sugar’s company. But he went on to work there for two and a half years, setting up a successful digital media business with his boss’ son Simon.
Lee worked for Alan Sugar’s Amshold company as a development director, developing Amscreen-branded digital display advertising products for the outdoor market. After deciding to leave, he said: “Having gained a huge amount of experience in my role at Amscreen, I felt now was the right time to start up on my own.”
Next, he founded a company, Raw Talent Academy, to help young people get recruitment and sales jobs. In 2010, Lee had 18 employees, and the firm was expected to make nearly £1.5million. He launched a technology platform, Phoenix51. He regularly appears as a co-host on Love Sport Radio’s Tottenham Fans Show.
Simon Ambrose – Series Three (2007)
The Apprentice winner Simon Ambrose worked for Lord Sugar for three years
Simon memorably caused Sir Alan to explode with frustration as he struggled to put together trampolines he was trying to flog on a television shopping channel. “Well, I’d like to think I’ve shown that a nice guy from a nice background sometimes can win,” he told Digital Spy.
But the Cambridge graduate won the series and went on to work for Lord Sugar’s property company Amsprop for three years, as well as studying to be a chartered surveyor. After leaving in 2010, Simon became a property developer, started running an events company and invested in a string of bars and restaurants in London.
Michelle Dewberry – Series Two (2006)
Michelle won the second series and is regularly on our TV screens(Image: PA)
After landing a £100,000 job with Lord Sugar, Michelle worked on the launch of Xenon Green, which specialised in computer equipment disposal. She left the company before the end of her 12-month contract and set up her own consultancy firm to support aspiring young entrepreneurs.
Michelle also became a Sky News TV pundit and runs a shopping website, dailychic.co.uk. In July 2020, Michelle gave birth to a little boy nine weeks early with former Crystal Palace chairman Simon Jordan. Since 2021, she has hosted her own prime-time GB News show called Dewbs & Co.
Tim Campbell – Series One (2005)
The first Apprentice winner Tim now joins Lord Sugar in the boardroom(Image: PA)
The first ever winner of The Apprentice, Tim stormed to victory in 2005 after the most gruelling job interview of his life. The former London Underground transport manager joined Lord Sugar’s company Amstrad and launched the Integra anti-wrinkle device at Argos and Harrods.
He left in March 2007 after two years working with the big boss and set up social enterprise Bright Ideas Trust to support young entrepreneurs from disadvantaged backgrounds. “I never saw the Apprentice, Lord Alan’s position, as a job for life,” he told The Guardian. “It was on a plate for me but that wasn’t what it was about. I never saw him as a blank cheque.”
Article continues below
Tim became head of client services for recruitment firm Alexander Mann Solutions and then London Mayor Boris Johnson’s ambassador for training and enterprise. In December 2013, Tim was diagnosed with testicular cancer but fought back with the support of his wife Jasmine and was given the all-clear.
Tim received an MBE for Services to Enterprise Culture in 2012 and co-founded bespoke digital marketing agency Marketing Runners Ltd in 2016. In 2022, he had a full-circle moment as he took on the role of Alan’s sidekick, taking over from Claude Littner as he dealt with medical issues.
Ben Affleck and Jennifer Lopez were only married for a couple of years before calling it quits in 2024, and the actor gave an update on his relationship with the singer months later
Ben Affleck has stayed fairly quiet about JLo since their separation, but finally revealed where they stand with each other
Ben Affleck shared a surprising insight into his relationship with Jennifer Lopez months after their split. The Hollywood star shared his real opinion on his ex, alongside describing how they’re managing their blended family.
Ben, 52, and Jennifer, 55, had fans jumping for joy when they got back together and tied the knot in July 2022 – decades after getting engaged for the first time in 2002. It turned out things weren’t meant to be even the second time around, and they separated in April last year before filing for divorce in August last year before they officially divorced on January 6, this year.
During their time together, however, they managed to successfully blend their brood of kids from previous relationships. Ben and his ex Jennifer Garner share Violet, 19, Fin, 16, and Samuel, 13.
Meanwhile, JLo shares twins Max and Emme, 17, with former husband Marc Anthony. Speaking at the premiere of his new film The Accountant 2 on April 16, Ben revealed how he, JLo, and the children are coping with the dramatic family change.
JLo’s twins joined Ben for his movie premiere, and he made it clear that their families were still happily blended despite the end of their marriage(Image: AFP via Getty Images)
Article continues below
Talking to Entertainment Tonight, Ben shared that despite the split he was having a “great night” – with JLo’s kids joining him alongside his own.
“My kids are here, Jen’s kids are here”, he said. “I’m very excited, I love the movie, I’m very proud of the movie. I love when all the kids come out and it’s really fun, it’s exciting”.
He then opened up about his current feelings towards the Hustlers star, explaining: “Listen, I don’t read the stuff online much, and sometimes I get the sense that people perpetuate this idea of – they want to find something negative to talk about.
JLo’s teenage twins, Emme and Max, joined Ben’s biological children at the premiere of The Accountant 2 – in which he has the starring role
” And look, Jennifer Lopez is spectacular. Great to my kids, great ongoing relationship with them. I love her kids, they’re wonderful. “
Ben added:” She’s enormously important. Tremendous person with a lot of integrity who I adore and am grateful to. I’m thrilled that the kids are here with me, and that’s the kind of thing – those relationships you have with children like that – joy in my life. “
When it was commented that Ben was a great dad to all of the kids in his life, he humbly noted:” I try my best, I certainly do. “
Ben said that he ‘ loves ‘ JLo’s ‘ wonderful ‘ kids, and described the woman herself as ‘ spectacular ‘ to him and his own children
Ben seems to be an expert at keeping good vibes after a relationship breakdown, and recently shared similarly gushing words when talking about Jennifer Garner, from whom he split in 2018.
Article continues below
“I’m really lucky that I have a really good co-parent and partner in Jennifer Garner, the kids’ mom, who’s wonderful and great and we work together well,” he told GQ Magazine.
It’s not the first time he’s fawned over his first wife – amid rumours of them rekindling their romance. A year after their separation, he praised: “She’s just a fabulous person. She’s a great mother. She’s a real talent… She’s somebody that I admire and respect and remain excellent friends with.”
Chelsea’s final Premier League home game of the season against Manchester United has been moved to ensure there is no clash with the Women’s FA Cup final between the two teams on Sunday, 18 May.
Instead, the Premier League game will be played on Friday, 16 May, with a 20:00 BST kick-off. It will be screened on Sky Sports.
The entire round of matches was scheduled for 18 May as the Premier League had already pledged it would not hold any games on men’s FA Cup final day on 17 May.
However, Chelsea’s meeting with United in the women’s equivalent the following day also created an issue.
Both clubs were keen for fans to be able to watch that Wembley showpiece as well as the men’s game and requested a change of date, which the Premier League agreed to.
The only other game in that match round not being played on the Sunday is Brighton’s home game with champions-elect Liverpool, which will now be played on Monday, 19 May (20:00 BST).
While the Chelsea-United game does go into an existing TV slot, it is a sign of the importance of the Women’s FA Cup final as a showpiece event that the Premier League agreed to the request.
