Isabelle McGregor, Trainee, is co-contributor to this article.
For years, the hit TV shows Succession has captivated audiences with its portrayal of a media empire torn apart by power struggles, inheritance battles and shifting family loyalties. Whilst the show is fictional, its inspiration is rooted in reality; many have drawn parallels between Succession and the Murdoch family, whose global media empire has long been the subject of scrutiny in the past. Recent developments in the Murdoch family trust dispute saw Rupert Murdoch’s attempt to alter the governance of his family trust rejected. As the characters in Succession have come to find out, this case serves as a valuable lesson for families navigating the delicate balance of succession, governance and control.
Murdoch trust dispute background
In December 2024, a Nevada probate commissioner denied Murdoch’s attempt to alter a family trust which governs substantial interests in the Murdoch media empire. While this high-profile dispute arises under US jurisdiction, it presents important considerations for those aiming to protect and pass on their wealth.
Under the current terms of the Murdoch family trust, Murdoch’s votes would be divided among his four eldest children upon his death, giving them equal voting power over Mudoch’s media empire, which includes Fox News and News Corporation. However, through an application brought in Nevada in 2024, Murdoch sought to vary the trust so that his son, Lachlan, would have greater control than his siblings. Questions were raised concerning fairness among the other beneficiaries and Murdoch’s proposed amendment was ultimately denied by the Court.
When a family trust encompasses substantial wealth or business interests, questions inevitably arise about who is authorised to make key decisions and how any proposed changes to the trust are sanctioned. In England, while the legal framework differs from that of Nevada, a similar dilemma could unfold if the trust deed is ambiguous or fails to anticipate evolving circumstances. Below are three key lessons arising from the Murdoch case:
Effective trust governance
A clearly drafted trust deed remains a cornerstone of effective wealth preservation. Unambiguous governance provisions, delineating each party’s rights and responsibilities, help avoid misunderstandings and potential legal challenges. Where control of business assets is a factor, trustees and beneficiaries must understand the processes for decision-making and amending trust terms.
Regular trust reviews
Trusts should be reviewed periodically to ensure they reflect the current family and commercial context. By proactively revisiting governance structures incrementally, families can reduce the likelihood of contentious disputes.
Dispute resolution strategies for trust management
Clearly articulated mechanisms for early dispute resolution, including mediation or arbitration clauses, can prevent disagreements from spiralling into costly litigation. Such provisions encourage open dialogue, potentially preserving relationships and safeguarding the settlor’s legacy.
Ultimately, the Murdoch case highlights how decisions about control and inheritance can quickly become highly charged, especially when considerable wealth is involved. Without good advice, many would-be settlors might also be surprised at their diminished ability to implement their intentions in respect of trust assets. For those wishing to mitigate similar disputes, a combination of transparent governance, routine trust reviews, and robust dispute resolution pathways can ensure that wealth and control of business assets is passed on smoothly and without acrimony.
