After missing out on a will almost seven years ago, Made In Chelsea star Lonan O’Herlihy has filed a lawsuit against the widow of the man who was his father figure when he was a child.
Made In Chelsea star Lonan O’Herlihy has sued the widow of the man who was his father figure during his childhood. The personal trainer, 36, who was known as the Posh PT during his time on the hit show, was left out of Hugh Taylor’s will.
The property dealer left a £38million estate, which includes a World War II Hawker Hurricane aircraft, classic cars and high-end properties, following his death in 2019, the majority of which was bequeathed to his wife Jennifer Taylor. Prior to his marriage to Ms Taylor, Hugh was in a ‘committed relationship’ with O’Herlihy’s mother from 1995 until 2003.
Lonan, who starred on Made In Chelsea alongside regulars like Spencer Matthews and Binky Felstead, is now suing Ms Taylor for £5 million and told the court: “Hugh was a father to me, and I was a son to him.”
READ MORE: Jamie Laing slammed after swipe at £6,000 a night maternity wardREAD MORE: Where ITV I’m A Celebrity winners are now – affairs, marriage and career U-turns
The TV star’s lawyer claimed that Taylor was “parental responsibility” to him while his mother and he were together, and that Lonan continued to support him financially until his early 20s. He continued, “He gave Lonan every reason to expect continued support in his real estate career.” Those assurances helped Linan make important life decisions, including his university studies.
Hugh’s considerable wealth was primarily derived from real estate transactions. He and Lonan frequently spoke about their business interests and agreed that Lonan would take over control of various empire divisions with an eye toward the inheritance of the whole. Additionally, it’s claimed that Ms. Taylor prevented Lonan from attending the funeral and that he began to feel “cut out” of his life.
Taylor’s attorney, Richard Wilson KC, argued that the claim was nothing less than “opportunistic.”
He said: “This is not a claim for reasonable provision for his maintenance,’ he continued. ‘It is his wish list of greed – houses, cars, watches, this is a world away from reasonable provision. His approach seems to be: this is a large estate, let’s give Mr O’Herlihy a big chunk of it.
The claimant’s assertion is genuinely bizarre. It would be impossible for him to be awarded for his maintenance capital assets, which include two properties, a classic car, a luxurious watch, and a painting, upon a request for reasonable financial provision. These are unrelated to the claimant’s payment of his daily expenses. The claim would be pointless because, in any case, the claimant has no need for maintenance, even if he were to make more modest demands.
The claimant is 36 years old, a graduate of a university, well-educated, self-employed, earns about £70 000 per year after taxes, has no dependents, and has good prospects for a future in terms of income. Even if the claimant’s claim that he was a “child of the family” for a while came to an end when the deceased and Mrs. O’Herlihy divorced in 2002.
Following a significant delay and after the estate has been divided, it is also well-out of time. And the claimant has no compelling reason to have delayed bringing it. The hearing is now going on.
Source: Mirror
Leave a Reply