A millionaire financier who claims he was falsely accused of rape by a girl who later killed herself has brought her father to court for a 'public rubbishing of his reputation.'

Trainee accountant Eleanor de Freitas, 23, claimed that she was raped by shipping magnate's son Alexander Economou, but she was later charged with lying and perverting the course of justice.

However, three days before she was due to go on trial, Eleanor, who suffered from bipolar disorder and depression, hanged herself at her family home in Fulham, west London.

Alexander Economou, a 37-year-old shipping magnate's son, is suing David de Freitas for libel over 'hints and nudges' to the media that implied he had gotten away with raping his daughter

Eleanor de Freitas, 23, accused Alexander Economou, 37, of rape in 2014, but was later put on trial for perverting the course of justice. She killed herself three days before it began

Mr Economou claims her father, David de Freitas (pictured) continued to make claims against him which made him the subject of a 'media frenzy, leading to publications in various media in November and December 2014

But Mr Economou, 37, who mounted a £200,000 action against her for lying about the rape, later taken over by the Crown Prosecution Service, said her father continued to imply he was guilty.

Mr Economou has now taken David de Freitas, a 60-year-old financial planner, to court over claims he made a series of 'hints and nudges' that made people believe he had committed the rape.

He said it created a 'media frenzy' and his life has never been the same since publications in various media in November and December 2014.

Though he was not named, he said a substantial number of people would have known who the claims referred to and thought 'there was no smoke without fire and that I might have got away with it'.

Mr Economou said the claims by Mr de Freitas made people think 'there is no smoke without fire'

Mr Economou told Mr Justice Warby in evidence that he was so 'stressed out' by the false allegations that he told his hairdresser, chiropractor and even his caretaker.

His counsel, Jonathan Barnes, said: 'Mr Economou is an innocent man.

'If Mr de Freitas had any legitimate basis upon which to challenge his innocence, then it was his responsibility to raise it when he entered his defence, with a plea of truth.'

He claimed that 'series of hints and nudges' that incriminated him were 'quite unacceptable.'

Manuel Barca QC for Mr de Freitas said the facts underlying the case were 'striking and tragic'.

He said they were not questioning Mr Economou's entitlement to a presumption of innocence, but said Miss de Freitas was also entitled to the same presumption because she was never tried.

But Mr Economou hit back, saying: 'The reality of the situation is she is guilty. It is a fact. Maybe not under the law but it is a fact.'

He said he believed the actions by Mr de Freitas were 'malicious', in 'bad faith', and 'out of revenge.'

Summarising his case Mr Barca said: 'In a nutshell, Mr de Freitas is squarely accused of dishonestly lashing out in public by publishing allegations in the media he knew to be untrue because he wanted to take his revenge on you as the man he blamed for his daughter's suicide.'

He said any comments he made were honestly held to restore the reputation of his daughter, and it was 'highly unlikely that they caused Mr Economou serious harm'.

Mr Economou says David de Freitas (left) made comments that made it look as though he had got away with raping his daughter Eleanor (right) after her death in 2014

But for the first time ever in a libel case Mr de Freitas is using the new public interest defence, under section 4 of the 2013 Defamation Act.

He said Mr Economou faced a 'daunting prospect' in trying to prove Mr de Freitas 'acted dishonestly, maliciously and unreasonably in publishing what he did.'

Mr Economou claims that Miss de Freitas (pictured) was guilty of lying about the rape

In London on Monday, Mr Barnes told Mr Justice Warby that Mr Economou’s life had not been the same since the 'media frenzy' began on November 6 2014.

Mr Economou was identified by a substantial but unquantifiable number of people as the man who was alleged to have prosecuted Ms de Freitas on a false basis and therefore was guilty of her rape.

'He endured five weeks of a public rubbishing of his reputation', said Mr Barnes.

Earlier this month Mr Economou was cleared of harassment against the de Freitas family after being accused of an 'aggressive' campaign against them.

It was alleged he 'hijacked her name' to brand her a prostitute. But he claims he was only trying to get the truth across after she accused him of rape.

In clearing him of harassment, Westminster Magistrates Court District Judge Tan Ikram said: 'Being wrongly accused of rape is no minor slight.'

In May, Mr de Freitas failed in a bid for a fresh inquest into her death. His claim that the coroner did not go far enough was said to be 'unarguable.'