The judge is entitled to come to a conclusion about the honesty or otherwise of a witness giving evidence before them - as long as they provide cogent reasons
Here is an excerpt from the actual case report:
Mr Peter Andre is a successful performer both as a pop singer and as the star of reality television and it is clear that his success is due in part to an engaging manner. However, he was an extremely unsatisfactory witness. Much of his evidence was (i) exaggerated, for example his evidence about the effect on him of Mr Hendricks' tweets and some frankly ridiculous evidence about everyone on the film set shaking in fear of Mr Hendricks even though he was not on the set at all or anywhere near it, or (ii) designed to show himself in a good light, for example his refusal to accept that he had wanted Ms Partridge removed from the programmes, in the face of correspondence from his own solicitors making that one of the conditions of continuing to work with the claimant. Regrettably I formed the view that on some issues his evidence was not truthful. Two examples are (i) his attempt to avoid knowledge of the fact that Ms Powell was writing to his own solicitor on 2 June 2011 discussing the removal of the claimant as production company, by claiming that he never read emails "cc'd" to him; and (ii) his evidence about what he alleged Ms Powell told him about the death threats, which I have concluded was a complete fabrication designed to denigrate Mr Hendricks and bolster Mr Andre's exaggerated evidence about the impact of the tweets. I suspect that Mr Andre was driven to some of the extremes he exhibited in his evidence out of loyalty to Ms Powell, but that did not make his evidence any more impressive or credible.
Peter Andre gave evidence about a fairly wide range of issues and not just to do with what he was told by Claire Powell. However, even if a witness is simply recounting what another individual told them, the judge is still entitled to come to a conclusion as to whether their reactions to that information were appropriate or whether they were essentially over-egging it, as he finds Andre was
For example, if my DH came home and said that a two year old patient had threatened him and he was terrified for his life, a judge would be entitled to find us both rather idiotic and unbelievable if we truly believed that that was the case - whatever my DH might have told me