The real-life “succession” battle for Rupert Murdoch’s media empire ended with a Nevada court commissioner refusing the billionaire’s bid to change the family trust and give control to his eldest son.
The case pits the 93-year-old against his three children over who will gain control of News Corp. and Fox News when he dies.
It is reported that Mr Murdoch wanted to amend a family trust created in 1999 to allow his son Lachlan to take control without “interference” from his siblings Prudence, Elizabeth and James.
A Nevada commissioner ruled that Mr. Murdoch and Mr. Lachlan had acted in “bad faith” and described the efforts as “a carefully crafted character.” According to the New York Times.
In a statement, a spokeswoman for Prudence, Elizabeth and James said: “We welcome Commissioner Gorman’s decision and look forward to moving forward with this litigation to strengthen and rebuild the relationship between all family members. can focus on building.”
Mr. Murdoch’s lawyer, Adam Streisand, told The New York Times that he was disappointed and planned to appeal.
A spokesman for Mr Murdoch declined to comment to the BBC. Mr. Streisand did not immediately respond to inquiries.
The famous family was an inspiration behind the hugely popular TV series Succession – which the Murdochs have always refused to comment on.
But according to a New York Times report, based on a copy of the sealed court ruling, the billionaire’s children began arguing about their father’s death and how they should handle it after an episode of the HBO series. will handle where “the patriarch of the family dies, leaving his family and business in chaos.”
According to reports, the incident led to Elizabeth’s representative at the trust writing a “‘succession’ memo” trying to prevent it from happening in real life.
The case went behind closed doors in Nevada, a state that offers a highly secretive legal system for matters including family trust disputes.
It has a “close on demand” statute that allows parties involved in certain sensitive cases to request that court proceedings be closed to public access, ensuring complete confidentiality.
Mr Murdoch, who has been married five times, also has two young children, Grace and Chloe, who have no voting rights under the trust agreement.
The case was launched after Mr Murdoch decided to replace the trust over concerns of a “lack of consensus” among children, the Times reported.
Lachin is considered more conservative than his siblings and will preserve the legacy of his media brands.
Since the 1960s, Mr. Murdoch has built a global media giant with enormous political and public influence.
His two companies are News Corporation, which owns newspapers including the Times and the Sun in the UK and the Wall Street Journal in the US, and Fox, which broadcasts Fox News.
Journalist Andrew Neil told the BBC’s 2020 documentary The Rise of the Murdoch Dynasty that Mr Murdoch was grooming his two sons to follow in his footsteps when they were teenagers.
The former Sunday Times editor said that family has always been very important to Rupert Murdoch, particularly from the point of view of family formation.
In 1999, the Murdoch family trust, which owns media companies, had to largely settle succession plans.
Because of this, Mr. Murdoch gave his older children various jobs in his companies.
The trust gives the family eight votes, which it can use to vote on the boards of News Corp. and Fox News. Mr Murdoch currently controls four of those votes, with his eldest children in charge of one each.
The trust agreement states that once Mr Murdoch dies, his votes will be transferred equally to his four eldest children.
However, it is said that differences in ideologies and political views lead to family rifts.
The battle over changes in trust was not about money, but about power and control over the future of the Murdoch empire.
The Commissioner’s decision is not final. The court filing serves as a recommended resolution, but a district judge will still consider it and may choose to rule differently.
It may take weeks or months for a judge to make a decision, which will not be available to the public.
Additional reporting by Michelle Fleury and Charlotte Edwards