Family Fortune Feud Ends in Court Defeat
A bitter inheritance dispute that tore apart a London family has reached its conclusion in court, with a daughter losing her legal battle against her brother over their mother's £1.1million fortune.
Aysel Gencay, 72, unsuccessfully claimed her older brother Dogan Halil, 74, had 'poisoned' their mother's mind against her, leading to her being cut from the will entirely.
The Halil Family Fortune
The case centred on the estate of Dervishe Halil, who moved to London from Cyprus with her husband in 1952 and built substantial wealth before her death at age 94 in 2021.
Her three children - Dogan, Aysel, and another brother Attila - were originally set to inherit equal shares under a will made in October 2013. However, over five years from 2013 to 2018, Mrs Halil changed her will three times, eventually leaving everything to her eldest son Dogan in her final 2018 will.
The dramatic shift in inheritance plans began with a rift between the siblings over property arrangements at the family home in Islington, north London.
The Letters That Changed Everything
The court heard how Aysel received a handwritten letter from her mother in 2015 threatening to cut her from the will unless she apologised and reconciled with Dogan.
'Your actions have destroyed my life and home,' Mrs Halil wrote to Aysel and Attila. 'Your actions towards your brother Dogan are very bad and shameful - we saw nothing but goodness from Dogan to all of us.'
When the siblings failed to meet their mother's conditions, Mrs Halil followed through on her warning in 2018, creating a new will that disinherited both Aysel and Attila.
In a 'side letter' attached to the final will, she declared: 'Aysel and Attila - none of the conditions in the letter I sent three years ago were fulfilled. Unfortunately, nothing has changed. You still do not talk to your brother Dogan, and you still do not show me love and respect.'
The Court's Decision
Aysel, who lives in Turkey, sued her brother as executor of the estate, claiming their mother either didn't understand her final will or had been unduly influenced by Dogan.
Her lawyer, Peter John, argued the 2018 will was 'completely at odds' with Mrs Halil's previous statements and her cultural background, which favoured equal treatment of children.
However, Judge Mark Raeside KC rejected all of Aysel's claims, finding that Dogan was simply a 'dutiful son' who had done his best for his ageing mother.
The judge noted that Mrs Halil had attended her solicitor alone when making her final will and was mentally sharp and aware of her decisions. He also determined that both critical letters were written in Turkish in Mrs Halil's own handwriting, with no assistance from Dogan.
'I reject the assertion that the deceased had any assistance from Dogan with her will,' Judge Raeside stated. 'The evidence makes clear he was simply a dutiful son.'
The court heard that Aysel had become 'fixated' with proving her brother's dishonesty, particularly regarding the basement of the valuable family property in Packington Street, which she accused him of 'slicing off' for his own benefit.
Ultimately, the judge upheld the validity of the 2018 will, leaving Dogan with the entire £1.1million estate and dismissing his sister's claims of fraudulent calumny.
