The contents of a 20-page document filed in the High Court by business partner of the late Dame Zaha Hadid have been made public.
Architecture website BDonline has published details of the allegations made by Patrik Schumacher, one of Hadid’s four named executors.
In November of last year, he asked the court to make him the sole trustee of her estate. Details released by BDonline reveal his claim that his three fellow executors have forced him to agree to the transfer of £7.75m from Zaha Hadid Limited (ZHL) to holding company Zaha Hadid Holdings (ZHH) controlled by them.
Artworks belonging to ZHL were also transferred; Schumacher claims he was threatened with the sack if he did not give his agreement.
In a letter of wishes dated the same day as her will, Hadid wrote: “Patrik Schumacher should as far as practicable be in control of the business of Zaha Hadid Ltd and Zaha Hadid Design Ltd and should benefit from at least 50% of their income and capital and the balance to be for the benefit of other employees.” She added that she wished the business to continue operating along the same principles as it had during her lifetime.
One of the other executors, Rana Hadid, niece of Hadid, claims that the letter of wishes was amended after he disrupted a meeting Zaha was having with her lawyers, something Schumacher ardently denies.
He states that the transfer of cash and assets from ZHL will reduce ZHL’s ability to continue as a going concern.
His lengthy allegations include:
- The executors, Lord Palumbo, Brian Clarke and Rana Hadid, maneuvered to have themselves appointed to the board of ZHH;
- Schumacher would have his employment with ZHL terminated if he did not agree to the transfer of cash and assets out of ZHL and the appointment of two new directors to the board;
- The name of Zaha Hadid was to be dropped from the firm and all “Zaha Hadid” trademarks be transferred to the Zaha Hadid Foundation;
- A letter was signed in February 2018 by 36 directors and senior staff at ZHL expressing serious concern about the suggested appointment of six new directors;
- A consultant, Charlotte Phillips, brought in with a colleague, was not independent by virtue of her close connection as friend and neighbour to one of the executors, Brian Clark;
- Phillips’ appointment to the board was objected to by the rest of the ZHL board;
- The board objected to a proposal that ZHL’s intellectual property rights be assigned to the Foundation and leased back to ZHL for a fee;
- Phillips decided that all contracts and salaries at ZHL must be pre-approved by ZHH;
- The board of ZHH resolved to direct ZHL to pay a dividend of £3.25m to ZHH.
Schumacher also claims he was prevented from speaking at Hadid’s memorial service, he was excluded from events at the Serpentine Gallery where an exhibition of Hadid’s work took place and he was excluded from email communications within ZHL asking staff for any questions concerning the estate.
He says he offered to stand down as executor and be replaced by a professional trustee provided the other three executors did the same. He now seeks to replace the other executors with professionals.
Schumacher states: “The defendants have improperly allowed their personal animosity towards and resentment of the claimant to influence their decision-making. As a result, they have failed to properly administer the estate and act in the best interests of the beneficiaries.”
A statement from Zaha Hadid Architects says: “We hope this matter can be settled quickly and amicably, to the satisfaction of all parties. After another successful year, the practice goes from strength to strength and our business is unaffected by the subject matter of the dispute. We remain focused on serving our clients and building on the achievements of Dame Zaha.”
Do you think Schumacher is justified in asking for the removal of his fellow three executors? Is the dispute likely to negatively impact on the beneficiaries?
