Michael Barrymore's compensation claim after suing police over his arrest will go to the high court.

The entertainer was held in 2007 after butcher Stuart Lubbock, 31, was found dead in a swimming pool after a party at Barrymore's house in Roydon in March 2001.

Barrymore, 64, has taken legal action against Essex Police as a result of being arrested and questioned.

A judge is expected to make a decision on damages after a High Court trial in the New Year.

Lawyers representing Barrymore and police on Wednesday (December 7) appeared at a preliminary High Court hearing in London.

They told a judge, Master Roger Eastman, that Barrymore had been arrested six years after Mr Lubbock's body was found, in June 2007.

The entertainer had never been charged with any offence as a result of his arrest, the judge was told.

Barrister Lorna Skinner, who headed Barrymore's legal team, said the arrest had received widespread publicity and had a "devastating" effect on the entertainer's career.

She said a judge would have to decide whether there had been ''reasonable grounds'' for Barrymore's arrest.

Master Eastman indicated that a trial would be staged in 2017.

The next preliminary hearing is scheduled to take place on December 21.

Barrymore, who in recent years has lived in New Zealand, has taken legal action under his real surname, Parker.

''The claim arises out of the arrest and detention of the claimant, better known by his stage name Michael Barrymore, on suspicion of rape and murder on

June 14 2007,'' said Miss Skinner in a written ''skeleton argument''.

''It has never been established that the deceased, Mr Stuart Lubbock, was either raped or murdered.''

Miss Skinner said Barrymore had never been charged with rape or murder, or any other offence resulting from his arrest.

She added: ''The claimant contends that the fact of his arrest on such serious charges - which received widespread publicity - had a devastating effect on his career and hence his earnings.''

Miss Skinner also outlined detail of arguments put forward by Essex Police and added: ''The defendant seeks to argue that the damages should be nominal.''