A legal dispute spanning three countries and involving an estimated $1bn fortune went before the High Court recently. The key issue involves access to tissue samples from the oligarch’s body, currently held securely by a London coroner. This case is one example of the type of issue the courts face with the continuing rise of Wills and inheritance disputes.
In November 2014 Kakha Bendukidze died aged 58 in the InterContinental Hotel, Park Lane after undergoing heart surgery in Zurich.
His widow, Natalia Zolotova, had expected to inherit his riches. However that was thrown into doubt after Anastasia Goncharova came forward as his daughter. The widow insists that Miss Goncharova is not Mr Bendukidze’s daughter. In turn Miss Goncharova disputes the widow’s claim on the fortune, saying they had been separated for years before he died.
Miss Goncharova stated “I have known Kakha since I was 10 but only found out he was my father seven years ago. If she’s saying I’m not my father’s daughter, then hand over the DNA samples and prove it. It’s as simple as that.”
The High Court requested that the tissue samples taken during the post-mortem examination be sent for DNA genetic testing to settle the parentage dispute once and for all. This was fiercely resisted by the widow.
After the court considered the rights to possession and control of a body and any samples taken Miss Goncharova is reported to have secured an early victory when the Court ordered the samples be sent for testing. With multiple claims going on all around the World, and all that is at stake Miss Goncharova will no doubt hope that this proves to be a significant step forward in her case.
The contents of this article are intended for general information purposes only and shall not be deemed to be, or constitute legal advice. We cannot accept responsibility for any loss as a result of acts or omissions taken in respect of this article.
Related insights
Contentious insolvency and cross-border enforcement post Brexit
On 1 January 2021, the free movement of people, goods and services between the UK and the EU ended, impacting many industries including the legal profession. But what does Brexit mean for contentious insolvency? Not only…
Read moreInsolvency practitioners cautioned by the Court over disclosure
ICC Judge Barber issued a stark reminder to Insolvency Practitioners and their lawyers in her judgment in Stewart & Ors –v- Watkins [2019] EWHC 1311 (Ch) that when bringing an…
Read more-
Insolvency and Companies Court Judge Mullen has given judgment for James Dowers as the liquidator of Pantiles Investments Limited (“Pantiles”), against its former director, Ms Sabine Winckler (“Ms Winckler”) following…
Read more Stay of proceedings-v-Jurisdiction and double proof in an insolvency context
An important decision for cross-border insolvency practitioners was handed down by the High Court on 22 March 2019 in the case of Bundeszentralamt Für Steuern (being the Federal Central Tax…
Read moreContentious insolvency update: section 423
The Court of Appeal has recently clarified the position on (a) whether section 423 of the Insolvency Act 1986 can apply to dividends, and (b) the circumstances in which the…
Read more