Brecqhou twin Sir Frederick Barclay has been slammed by the High Court Judge for ignoring an order to put the proceeds of a luxury yacht sale towards £100m divorce payments - instead keeping the money for himself.
Mr Justice Cohen ordered the reclusive business mogul to pay his estranged wife, Lady Hiroko Barclay, £100m as part of divorce proceedings.
The Guardian reported that Barclay, 86, breached a court order to sell a luxury yacht and produce the proceeds. The newspaper also reports that Barclays has ought to prevent publication of the ruling, while Lady Hiroko - to whom he was married for 34 years - argued for the judgment to be made public.
Journalists were allowed to attend earlier stages of proceedings but not report on them.
“Part of [Barclay’s] available assets included a luxury yacht which was on the market for sale,” said Mr Cohen in his ruling this week.
“I made orders intended to control the sale and the use of the proceeds. He completely ignored those orders, sold the yacht and applied the equity for his own use. I regarded that behaviour as reprehensible.”
In a statement, Sir Frederick said: “I am saddened that after 34 years my marriage has come to an end. This was not something I wanted. I hope my former wife can find happiness. I wish her well.”
The decision follows speculation over the fate of the Barclay brothers’ island haven, Brecqhou.
Pictured: There had been speculation about the fate of Breqhou.
The combination of the recent death of Sir David of a "short illness" in January, family feuding, and the divorce proceedings for Sir Frederick had together raised the question of whether the island might be sold off if the pair’s assets had to be divided up.
The reclusive twins - who last year had a combined wealth of £7 billion - bought 32-hectare Brecqhou in 1993 and built their own fortress-come-mansion on the small Channel Island.
Alongside his late brother, Sir Frederick previously owned the Ritz, before the famed London hotel was sold last year, leading to a family feud that resulted in court proceedings.
The case involved allegations that Sir David’s sons had bugged the Ritz conservatory in what was described in court as “commercial espionage on a vast scale."
Comments on this story express the views of the commentator only, not Bailiwick Publishing. We are unable to guarantee the accuracy of any of those comments.
Once your comment has been submitted, it won’t appear immediately. There is no need to submit it more than once. Comments are published at the discretion of Bailiwick Publishing, and will include your username.
There are no comments for this article.