Rupert Murdoch has lost the legal battle to make significant amendments in the family trust to transfer control of his empire to his eldest son, Lachlan Murdoch, on Monday. The blow to the 93-year-old media mogul has come after a US family court in Nevada rejected his demand to make changes in a family trust that was created in 1999 to divide Murdoch’s mega media empire amongst his four oldest children, according to the New York Times. The court ruled that the three of his adult children, James, Elisabeth and Prudence will continue to have control over Rupert’s media companies.
The Nevada commissioner said Rupert’s move to change the family trust was in “bad faith”. Additionally, the commissioner accused the 93-year-old media mogul of making a “carefully crafted charade to permanently cement Lachlan Murdoch’s executive roles” regardless of its impact on the other beneficiaries of the family trust.
Also Read: Sparring Siblings
“We welcome Commissioner Gorman’s decision and hope that we can move beyond this litigation to focus on strengthening and rebuilding relationships among all family members,” said James, Elisabeth and Prudence in a statement, according to NYT.
Murdoch vs. Murdoch: Battle of Succession
According to a family trust formed in 1999, Murdoch’s four eldest children- Lachlan, Prudence, Elisabeth and James, will acquire equal voting rights across Rupert’s various media ventures. The Murdoch family trust owns the media companies and was set up to draw succession plans. Family trust is designed in a way that the rights given to each of his four children are ‘irrevocable’.
Also Read: Protecting The Family Riches
However, Rupert wished to transfer the majority of the rights to his eldest son, Lachlan, whom he reportedly grew closer to due to their ideological alignment. Rupert Murdoch reportedly felt that the other three children would overrule the decision of Lachlan. Additionally, the rift between the children might severely impact his media businesses in the future. This is what prompted the 93-year-old media mogul to amend the family trust. The move would have naturally taken away the voting rights of the other three children.
The three of his oldest children went to the Nevada court to stop Rupert from making amendments to the family trust.
