A WEALTHY couple who claimed their “devious little sod” of a nephew tried to steal their £4million house have left him with a £150k bill.
Michael Lee, 79, and wife King-Su Huang, 73, became neighbours to Chariots of Fire producer Sir David Puttnam after snapping up a three-bed home in swanky Queen’s Gate Place Mews, Kensington, in 2004.
Champion News Service LtdKing-Su Huang is pictured outside the court following the hearing[/caption]
Champion NewsCheng-Jen Ku was ordered to pay a hefty £150k bill[/caption]
Champion News Service LtdMr Lee blasted Mr Ku as a “devious little sod”[/caption]
But as the house was bought in the name of their “very close” nephew, Cheng-Jen Ku, 40, who also has a room there, the family were left fighting a bitter court battle.
Mrs Huang sued her nephew – backed by her husband Mr Lee as a key witness – for a ruling that, despite being in his name, she was always the rightful owner.
Mr Ku however claimed that the house is his because it was “gifted” to him by his auntie.
But now Judge Alan Johns has ruled that Mr Ku could not have been the owner of the swanky Kensington mews as he claimed.
The court heard how the nephew quit the property because he was fed up with “too strict” house rules imposed by his aunt and uncle.
Mr Ku had initially lived there and later claimed he was the true owner of the house and that it had been “gifted” to him in line with Taiwanese tradition by his rich auntie.
However, he told Judge Alan Johns that he had later moved out of the multi million pound house because his “auntie and uncle were too strict”.
Commenting that his behaviour “didn’t look like the actions of an owner,” Judge Johns went on to rule that the true beneficial owner of the house is his aunt, Mrs Huang, handing Mr Ku a hefty court bill of over £150,000.
The exclusive cobbled mews was once the epicentre of the world’s classic car trade and the site from which motor racing legend Alain De Cadenet ran his Le Mans team.
Businessman Mr Lee, who made his fortune through a £13 million Essex electronics company, met his wife while working in Taiwan and later channelled his cash into a property portfolio.
And when he and his wife found the property in Queen’s Gate Place Mews, just a short walk from the Royal Albert Hall and Natural History Museum, they decided to snap it up.
Mr Ku, a “close” nephew whom Mr Lee had been fond of as a “cute little kid,” had lived with the couple in their £1m-plus Essex former home after moving to the UK from Taiwan.
Mr Lee told the judge that his wife handed their nephew £1.57m to buy the house in his name, explaining that for “privacy” reasons and to prevent the property being called on as collateral for business loans they wanted to put it in Mr Ku’s name.
It is now worth more than twice the price that was paid, with lawyers valuing it at up to £4m.
Mr Ku became its registered owner, initially living there, though his aunt and uncle also had keys and a room in the house.
But he later went on to claim the house was his because it was “gifted” to him by his aunt, a claim blasted as “piffle” by Mr Lee in evidence during the trial.
Mrs Huang sued her nephew – backed by her husband Mr Lee as a key witness – for a ruling that, despite being in his name, she was always the rightful owner.
‘DEVIOUS LITTLE SOD’
Mr Lee told the judge that his nephew had gone from being “a cute little kid” nicknamed “Trouble” to become “mean and nasty” in adulthood.
“He is trying to steal our house because he has turned out to be a devious little sod and that’s why we’re in court,” he said from the witness box.
Mrs Huang’s barrister Rupert Cohen told the judge there had been a clear understanding that, despite being in their nephew’s name, she was the true owner, with her nephew holding it on trust for her.
She and her husband paid all the bills owing for the house and claimed her nephew only ever used the property “with her consent”.
However, Mr Ku’s barrister, Scott Redpath, claimed the clear intention was to “give this property to him”.
Ruling against the nephew, Judge Johns said: “The case for Mrs Huang was that the house was held for her on trust.
“Mr Ku’s position was that there was no agreement and no trust because the intention was to make a gift of the mews house to him and that in Taiwanese culture such gifting was normal.
“Where a property is put into the name of one party solely, the first issue is whether the other party was intended to have any interest at all.
“When a land is conveyed to one person, but another person provides the money, there is a a presumption that there is a resulting trust in favour of the paying party unless it can be shown there was an intention to make a gift or loan.
“I’ve reached a clear conclusion that the intention in this case was for the mews house to be owned by Mrs Huang. Indeed there was an express agreement to that effect.
“There was an express discussion over the telephone before the house was purchased in which she said she wanted to buy a property but use Mr Ku’s name. He agreed.
“As understood by the parties, it was an arrangement not that the mews house was to be Mr Ku’s but was to be Mrs Huang’s and just to be held in Mr Ku’s name.
“Mr Ku accepted in cross-examination that Mrs Huang hid wealth by using the names of family members.
“In correspondence, Mr Ku at no time asserted that the house had been a gift to him.
“It was understood by the trustee and the beneficial owner that the trustee had no beneficial interest in the property.”
The judge said the couple had paid all the outgoings on the property and costs of two major renovations, adding: “Mr Ku made little or no contribution.”
The judge commented: “The true owner was Mrs Huang. The motivation was privacy and a gift was not intended. I make a declaration that the mews house is held in trust by Mr Ku for Mrs Huang.”
He ruled that Mr Ku is liable to pay his auntie and uncle’s lawyers’ bill of around £115,000.
Mr Ku will also have to pay his own legal fees, which were estimated before the trial at £35,000.
Published: [#item_custom_pubDate]
