In a scene that might have been portrayed in the fictional TV series, Succession, a district court in Nevada in the US has ruled against media mogul Rupert Murdoch’s bid to change his family trust and transfer control to his eldest son.
The move by the former chairman of Fox Corp and News Corp had set him at odds with three of his other five children, sparking a real-life power battle within the family, similar to the HBO series’ storyline, which focuses on how the family members of a global media conglomerate fight for control.
The Murdoch Family Trust was created in 1999 and includes Fox News and News Corp. It is currently set to be divided between four of 93-year-old Murdoch’s children – 66-year-old Prudence from his first marriage and 56-year-old Elisabeth, 53-year-old Lachlan and 51-year-old James from his second marriage – after his death. The business tycoon also has two other children named Grace and Chloe from his third marriage, but they do not have any voting rights in the trust.
So what has led to this legal fight and family drama?
According to a New York Times report on Monday, Nevada Probate Commissioner Edmund J Gorman Jr ruled that Rupert Murdoch and his eldest son, Lachlan, had acted “in bad faith” by trying to change the trust agreement.
In a 96-page opinion, the commissioner found that the pair’s plan to change the terms of the trust was a “carefully crafted charade” to “permanently cement Lachlan Murdoch’s executive roles” of the empire, without considering the implications it would have on the other three children’s ownership rights.
Adam Streisand, a lawyer for Rupert Murdoch’s side of the case, told the New York Times that while he and Lachlan are disappointed in the outcome, they intend to appeal the court’s ruling.
United Arab Emirates Dirham Exchange Rate
