Glue dynasty ‘comes unstuck’ over trust details
The family of a famous inventor are embroiled in a legal battle
over the financial divisions of their ancestor's trust, as legal
fees threaten to overshadow victory for either side.
The de Bruynes are one of Britain's wealthiest families
following success in the construction market, established by
ancestor Dr Norman de Bruyne, inventor of the famous Araldite
glue.
But the inventor's son, daughter-in-law and grandchildren are
now squabbling over the family trust created to divide share assets
from the late Dr's Techne Corporation, worth several million
pounds.
In 1971, Dr de Bruyne's created a trust in his wife and
children's name to detail provisions for his multi-million pound
fortune. These were passed on to son John de Bruyne under an
agreement signed in November 1991 by John and his sister Ann, on
the basis that they were to be held in trust for John's five
children.
In 1994, John and his wife Tracey sold their shares to another
UK company for over £5m. Following their divorce in 2004, a
complicated bout of litigation ensued, involving all five children,
over who had the right to the assets funded by the sale of the
shares.
Last October, Cambridge County Court ordered John to pay Tracey
£560,000 and also ruled that three of their children each had a
right to one fifth of the disputed assets, now worth
£2.5m.
Mr and Mrs de Bruyne are currently appealing the county court
decision in an effort to have the assets allocated to their
children divided between them as part of their divorce battle.
So far the legal battle has cost in excess of £300,000 and the
Court of Appeal has warned that further battles could severely
damage the family's fortune.
"A lot of the issues seem to be not so much between husband and
wife as between parents and children," said Lord Justice Thorpe.
"This is an intergenerational dispute and this is a family that
seems to be diminishing rather than increasing its wealth."
As the hearing continues, families involved in similar
situations should assess the damage court action can bring on
assets and consider alternative arrangements, such as mediation, to
dampen the effects of court action.