A Russian billionaire’s son lost more than £35million trading in stocks and shares when he was a student in London, a High Court judge has heard.
Temur Akhmedov, whose parents bought him a £29million flat in London when he was 19, traded at home while studying private banking at the London School of Economics between 2013 and 2016, Mrs Justice Gwynneth Knowles was told.
Detail of his lifestyle and trading losses emerged at a High Court trial on Monday, after he became embroiled in his parents’ £450million divorce battle.
Tatiana Akhmedova, 48, who is Russian but lives in London, is trying to get £453million she says she is owed by her ex-husband, 65-year-old Farkhad Akhmedov.
She has sued Temur, who now works as a trader in London, and claims he has helped his father hide assets and owes her nearly £70million.
She alleged he acted as his father’s ‘lieutenant’, colluding with him to conceal their fortune and ensure she did not receive the landmark divorce payout.
Temur was accused of being a ‘compulsive liar’ who had ‘perverted the course of justice’ in court on Monday.
Tatiana Akhmedova, 52, (pictured) is suing her son over claims that he acted as his father’s ‘lieutenant’ and colluded with him to conceal his fortune
The court also heard how Temur was given a £120,000 Mercedes jeep at the age of 17 and a £29million luxury flat when he was 19 and a student at the London School of Economics.
Located in Britain’s most expensive block of flats, his ‘student digs’ cost a further £5 million to refurbish and had an annual service charge of £160,000.
Giving evidence at the start of the trial, Ms Akhmedova was asked why she was suing Temur and not his younger brother Edgar, 23 who also received millions of pounds from his father.
She said: ‘It was obvious to me that Temur played an active role in siding with my ex about the divorce and trying to hide assets and doing many more other things.
‘Edgar was never actively involved. If anything, sometimes he was manipulated and pressurised into siding with my ex and Temur and they are continuing this.’
Her lawyers accuse Temur of being complicit in his father’s ‘schemes’ submitting a series of messages to the court as proof.
In one, he describes her as ‘unfaithful, dishonest and not clean,’ and reveals in another that his father wants to ‘cut her balls off.’
Temur Akhmedov, 27, (pictured) is alleged to have been given over £90 million from 2015 onwards from his father
Following a meeting in Qatar he attended to discuss transferring his father’s wealth there, before the divorce settlement, he writes: ‘He does not want the British courts to use extortion against him, for all his hard-earned monies in Siberia, to go to anyone else… The British are screwing Russians and Arabs.’
In another, he writes: ‘If the Tatiana problem did not exist, my Father would not move his assets anywhere…!! He wants to MOVE OUT OF SWITZERLAND… CUT HER BALLS OF[F]… GET DIVORCED… POST NUPTIAL AGREEMENT… And be a FREE MAN.’
Asked while giving evidence about the Mercedes jeep, Ms Akhmedova said it actually cost £90,000 and was bought for Temur because he was ‘eager to have a car’ and she wanted him to be safe on the roads with a ‘robust’ vehicle.
Robert Levy, QC, representing Temur responded: ‘So are Skodas and Volvos.’
He told her: ‘I’m not here to defend your ex-husband’s conduct towards you or defend or justify his failure to meet his financial obligations.
‘I’m here to explore your claims that you make against your eldest son Temur.’
At the start of today’s hearing, Temur was accused of defying a number of earlier High Court orders and failing to disclose information that could be relevant to the case contained in electronic devices he owned and details about his personal wealth, including how much cash he kept in a safe.
Alan Gourgey QC, representing Ms Akhmedova told the court that Temur had submitted a last-minute statement admitting to defying a number of court orders but ‘continues to lie.’
He said: ‘He’s admitted deliberate breaches of court orders. He’s a compulsive liar.
‘His lies and deception have continued over the past fortnight and we say continue today. Evidence of his misconduct is overwhelming.’
The court also heard sensational details from the housekeeper at the Akhmedov family villa in the south of France, who claims that Temur deliberately bribed a DHL courier to ‘lose’ electronic devices he was instructed to hand over to the court earlier this year,
This included mobile phones, laptops and tablets, which Ms Akhmedova’s lawyers had asked for, claiming they could have information relevant to their case.
Ms Akhmedova secured Britain’s largest divorce settlement from her ex-husband Farkhad Akhmedov, 64, (pictured)
Temur was in France at the time the order was made, with the housekeeper alleging that she was also involved in bribing the courier when he came to collect them for dispatch to the court.
The housekeeper has arrived in London to give evidence on behalf of Ms Akhmedova at the High Court, but the judge has still not decided if she will be allowed to do so.
Temur denies the bribery allegation but admits that he did not hand over all the electronic devices he was ordered to because ‘I wanted things to disappear.’
He claims that he took some of them to the family home in Moscow and is now making arrangements for them to be sent to London for the current trial.
In his statement, Temur also confessed to owning a number of luxury cars, including a £350,000 Rolls Royce and three brand new Mercedes which he initially insisted were not his.
Mr Gourgey told the Honourable Mrs Justice Knowles: ‘These are not cheap cars.’
The judge replied: ‘I’ll take your word for it. I am not a petrol head.’
Akhmedova was handed ownership of the couple’s £20m Surrey home (pictured)
In addition to half of Mr Akhmedov’s billion-pound fortune, assets at stake include a private jet and an Aston Martin (pictured)
Mr Gourgey also revealed that after initially claiming that only £45,000 was kept in the safe at the home in France as a ‘float,’ which he was responsible for, Temur was now admitting that the figure was actually £182,000 and that it had been increased after he and his father won money at a Monaco casino.
The issue of Temur’s financial position is crucial to the case as Ms Akhmedova alleges that her ex-husband gave him more than £90 million as way of putting his wealth ‘beyond her reach.’
Robert Levy, QC, representing Temur admitted to the court that his client had now ‘fessed up to significant and serious breaches of court orders.’
He added: ‘The fact of the matter is that he has played fast and loose for several months in a misguided attempt to avoid delivering documents. He’s appeared today, he’s apologised and promises to assist.
‘He can be cross examined about all falsehoods that have been revealed as a result of this late ‘Come to Jesus’ moment.’
Speaking ahead of the trial, Temur told MailOnline that he no longer loves his mother.
He fumed: ‘She doesn’t deserve to be called mother and I don’t love her anymore.
‘How can you love someone who wants to bring you down completely. It makes me very sad that I don’t have a mother anymore.
‘She’s trying to put me in prison and destroy me. If she was on the streets and needed help, then maybe I could understand what she’s doing. But she’s not. She lives in a £20 million house which has £40 million worth of art inside it.’
Assets at stake include a £115million art collection featuring paintings by Andy Warhol (pictured), Mark Rothko and Damien Hirst
Amongst the other assets Ms Akhmedova is fighting for from her ex-husband in other cases include his £350 million mega yacht Luna, which he purchased from Chelsea owner Roman Abramovich and his £100 million art collection.
Although Mr Akhmedov is said to have offered his ex-wife £100 million to settle, she has pursued him through the courts in five countries, with today’s High Court action against her son the latest in a series of high-profile legal battles.
Last month, members of his mother’s legal team raided Temur’s London apartment which was given to him by his father when he was aged 19, to search for documentation relevant to the case.
According to court documents, 58 electronic devices were seized from the luxury flat including mobile phones, memory sticks and even a Peppa Pig game.
An underground car park and wine cellar were also searched for any evidence that he helped his father to stop his money from being seized by the British courts.
The jewel in the crown for both sides is the Luna, a £350million superyacht that used to belong to Chelsea owner Roman Abramovich (pictured)
Temur’s lawyers maintain that much of the money was for an agreement he had with his father to invest his money for him in the stock market.
Referring specifically to the money Temur lost, his lawyers maintain that he told his mother about it and she even comforted him, knowing that it was not part of any ‘scheme’ to hide Mr Akhmedov’s wealth.
Temur’s lawyers state: ‘Of central significance is the fact that Temur told Tatiana that he had lost US$50m that his father had given him for trading. If, as Tatiana would (wrongly) have this Court believe, that $50m (increased later to US$60m), was part of Farkhad’s scheme to put that very sum (amongst others) beyond Tatiana’s reach then it is truly incredible that Temur would have messaged his mother to tell her that he had just lost $50m.’
They also maintain that Mr Ahmedov had been spending millions of pounds on Temur and his brother Edgar well before the marriage started falling apart and it was not unusual for him to give them large amounts of money.
The court also heard how Temur was given an unlimited credit card when he left home at 18 and also had use of his father’s super yacht, aeroplane and helicopter.
Temur’s lawyers insist: ‘Some of the extremely rich lavish their children with unimaginable sums.
‘That Farkhad is also, alleged to have wrongly sought to put the vast bulk of his (known) wealth beyond Tatiana’s reach in complicated off-shore structures, does not mean that the sums he gave his son when he approached adulthood and for his business activities, are part of the same alleged scheme or infected by the same (wrongful) intention. They are plainly not.’
Ms Akhmedova accuses her husband, with Temur’s help, of setting up a complex web of trusts and offshore bank accounts to stash millions of pounds in cash and shares so that it would appear that he did not have any money to pay his ex-wife.
Ms Akhmedov is also involved in litigation to try and secure her divorce settlement from her ex-husband via a number of trusts and companies he established in four other countries; the US; Dubai; Russia and Liechtenstein.
The hearing continues.