Benji "the Binman" Pell yesterday won a high court action against a businessman who duped him into handing over thousands of pounds to make a Hollywood blockbuster of his life story, despite being condemned by the judge for attempting to pass himself off as "an absolute nutter".

Mr Pell, who has made a living by scavenging through the rubbish bins of the rich and famous and selling their private papers to newspapers, won back £77,000 from John Mappin, whom he had sued for fraudulent misrepresentation.

During the hearing, the court was told Mr Mappin had promised to introduce Mr Pell to some of the biggest names in Hollywood, and demanded the money to pay for the travel costs and expenses of an American "filmmaker" who had helped shape the career of John Travolta.

In fact, the filmmaker turned out to be Mr Mappin's hairdresser, Iain Jones. In his evidence, Mr Mappin agreed he had extolled the virtues of Mr Jones but said he made it clear that any film project was completely speculative.

In his ruling yesterday, Mr Justice Gray described the decision he had to make as to who was telling the truth in the case as an "unwelcome task".

"I have already commented that the business in which Mr Pell is engaged is contemptible," he said. "Whether or not he was guilty of stealing documents, Mr Pell was dealing dishonestly in other people's confidential information."

Describing a videotape which showed Mr Pell boasting about his ability to deceive judges and court officials, the judge said: "He appears proud of his ability to pass himself off as 'an absolute nutter' so as to hoodwink his psychiatrist."

But, the judge ruled, Mr Pell's conduct in the witness box "paled into insignificance" when compared to Mr Mappin's "mendacity" in the case.

He said his deception began when he "lied to the police" over the money Mr Pell had paid to him, and he "compounded" his lies by "putting before the court a witness statement which gives a wholly mendacious account of his dealings with Mr Pell".

The judge added that it was only after discussions with his barrister that Mr Mappin withdrew the false witness statement.

"Ironically, the second witness statement indicates that Mr Pell was telling the truth in relation to many of the matters which Mr Mappin had controverted in his first witness statement," the judge said. "I have no hesitation in concluding that the claims which Mr Mappin made about Mr Jones were, and were known by him to be, false.

"Mr Jones was, as I have found, a hairdresser. No doubt he cut the hair of some famous actors and actresses and may well have got to know some of them socially. But Mr Jones had no knowledge or experience of filmmaking, as Mr Mappin, his best friend, must have been well aware.

"Mr Jones was certainly not a suitable person to make a blockbuster film about Mr Pell, as Mr Mappin well knew.

"Mr Mappin was wholly unable to explain why he never mentioned to Mr Pell that his friend was a hairdresser who had never directed or produced a film."

After the judgment, Mr Pell said the money he paid over in 1999 represented his life savings."But I'm happy with the decision and with my lawyers."

Mr Mappin, who was also ordered to pay costs estimated at £250,000, said the high court failed to understand the way Hollywood worked. "We are actually on track to deliver exactly what was promised to Mr Pell," he said. "There are no guarantees where filmmaking is concerned, but the Pell film project is certainly on track."