£950 vintage stuffed pike at the heart of bitter £6.8m inheritance row proves to be a red herring as judge snubs three horse-riding sisters' claims and awards family farm to their brother

  • Reading time:6 min(s) read
Movie channels                     Music channels                     Sport channels

  • Alister Cutts and his three sisters inherited a Hampshire farm from their parents
  • The sisters sued after trustees decided to sell the farm to Alister for £4.2million 

A £950 stuffed pike has had its day in court, as three horse-riding sisters lost a bizarre £6.8m fight with their brother over the family fortune.

Former aspiring Team GB Olympic horsewoman Charlotte Springall, 48, and her sisters Victoria Delville-Cutts and Cecilia Delville-Lindsay, 55, started a legal war with their brother, Alister Cutts, over the future of the multimillion-pound family farm in the New Forest.

Following the death of their wealthy parents, control of the farm was left in the hands of trustees headed by the siblings’ cousin Paul Cutts, who decided to allow Alister, 51, to buy it for £4.2m – allegedly a huge ‘discount’ on the open market value of £6.8m.

They sued at London’s High Court, claiming the trustees had breached their duties by treating Alister more favourably than themselves as the other beneficiaries of the trust.

At the heart of the row was a £950 vintage stuffed pike, bought at auction for Paul Cutts by Alister’s staff, which the sisters insisted was evidence that Alister was their cousin’s favourite.

Charlotte Springall, 48, has lost a lawsuit alongside her sister Victoria and Cecilia contesting the sale of Folds Farm in Fordingbridge, Hampshire, to their brother Alister for £4.2million

Charlotte Springall, 48, has lost a lawsuit alongside her sister Victoria and Cecilia contesting the sale of Folds Farm in Fordingbridge, Hampshire, to their brother Alister for £4.2million

Charlotte (left) and sisters Victoria Delville-Cutts (right) and Cecilia received the sale money from the farm after debts had been cleared, but they argued its market price was £6.8million

Charlotte (left) and sisters Victoria Delville-Cutts (right) and Cecilia received the sale money from the farm after debts had been cleared, but they argued its market price was £6.8million

But Judge Julia Clark has now dismissed the sister’s fish argument as a red herring, handing victory – and the farm – to their brother at the £4.2m price tag.

The siblings are the children of south London garage chain millionaire Oliver Cutts, who rose from being a south London coalman to a successful tycoon, ploughing much of his multimillion-pound fortune into Folds Farm, Fordingbridge, Hampshire, which passed to his widow Susan Cutts upon his death in 1995.

The farm boasts a thriving livery stable operation and heritage breed cattle and pigs, which are farmed by Alister alongside his plant hire business, as well as lucrative trout fishing in the River Avon and a glamping site.

Before their mother’s death, the siblings shared the farm, with Charlotte – who now runs her own stud and stables – and then Victoria running the equestrian yard.

But a ‘deep rift’ between the siblings over the future of the farm developed in the wake of the death of family matriarch Susan in 2015.

The farm was left in the hands of trustees by Susan, who instructed them in a letter of ‘deathbed wishes’ to make every effort to keep it in the family.

The trustees, headed by the siblings’ cousin Paul Cutts – ultimately decided to ‘assign’ the whole farm to Alister for £4.2m – with that money to be split between the sisters after debts are cleared.

They made that move having decided it was unrealistic for the siblings to jointly own and run the farm anymore as they had fallen out so badly.

But the furious sisters sued, complaining their brother was getting the holding for £2.6m under its open market worth of £6.8m.

Alister Cutts (left) with his sister Charlotte Springall (right)

Alister Cutts (left) with his sister Charlotte Springall (right)

They told the judge, Master Julia Clark, that the trustees had acted unfairly and accused their cousin Mr Cutts of displaying favouritism, as he is ‘close and friendly’ with their brother.

The sisters argued that the purchase of a stuffed pike at a Bonham’s auction for £950 by one of Alister’s staff for their cousin was a key piece of evidence to support that argument.

The court heard Alister had instructed his assistants to buy the vintage fish, having learned that it had been caught by his cousin’s father.

Giving evidence, Victoria, who runs a boutique stable on the Belgium-Holland border specialising in equine salt therapy, said the sisters were being treated unfairly.

Victoria claimed the trustees had a duty to act impartially, but favoured Alister, telling the judge: ‘The mathematics says it. It’s heart-breaking. You are either fair or not fair.

‘My sisters and I don’t mind Alister buying the farm – but at the correct rate.’

But Mr Cutts insisted: ‘I’m no closer to Alister than any of the others.’

Giving her ruling, Master Clark rejected any suggestion of favouritism by the family trustees, and dismissed the evidence of the stuffed fish.

‘Mr Cutts sets out that, in 2013, Alister let him know that a stuffed pike that had previously belonged to Mr Cutts’ father was coming up for sale at an auction,’ she explained.

‘Alister offered to bid on the pike on Mr Cutts’ behalf; and Alister’s assistant managed to buy it for £950, which Mr Cutts refunded with an extra £50 for the assistant.

‘Mr Cutts saw this as returning a favour: He had told Alister about a stuffed chub which had belonged to (Alister’s dad) Oliver coming up for auction at Bonhams; and Alister and Susan went to the auction and bought it.

‘The suggestion that these dealings show a level of closeness between Mr Cutts and Alister which would affect Mr Cutts’ conduct as a director of the trustees is in my judgment unarguable.’

Ruling in Alister’s favour, the judge highlighted Susan’s desire that the farm should stay in the family, pointing out that none of her daughters seemed to have tried to take it on after her death.

She added that the trustees had also comprehensively analysed the competing property valuations on the farm and their decision was reasonable.

‘Alister was effectively the only candidate and the fact that the trustees allowed him into occupation is not evidence of bias or favouritism,’ she concluded, approving the trustees’ decision to transfer Alister the farm for £4.2million despite his sisters’ protests.