A man has won an £850,000 court battle after his 90-year-old grandad sued to reclaim money he had spent on his grandson's home and five-star wedding. Businessman Robert Stokes, the fourth generation of family decorating supplies firm Stokes Tiles, had hoped his grandson Sebastian, 31, would take over the business and "indulged" him with huge sums, a court heard.
Grandad's Generosity
Robert stumped up over £720,000 towards Sebastian's £1m home and tens of thousands more, including over £10,000 for flowers, for his luxury wedding to wife Olivia, 34, at five-star Grantley Hall, North Yorkshire. Despite Robert being "guest of honour" at the wedding, the pair ended up in a court fight following a family rift, with the businessman demanding his grandson sell his newly refurbished house to return the money, claiming it had been loaned.
Sebastian insisted the money had been given as "gifts", with his lawyers blaming "jealousy" from other family members over his "favourite" status for stoking the feud. The case reached the High Court in Leeds in March, with Judge Richard Carter dismissing Robert's claim, finding the payments were indeed gifts to the grandchild he considered "the future" of the business.
Business Background
Stokes Tiles grew out of a decorating supplies firm that began in 1895 before expanding after Robert took over. It now operates from a 100,000sq ft warehouse in the Rother Valley, near Sheffield. The court heard the relationship between grandad and grandson had previously been harmonious, with Sebastian giving up a banking career to join the family business. The alleged "loans" at the centre of the dispute totalled about £850,000 and were made between 2020 and 2022, said the judge.
More than £720,000 went towards Sebastian and Olivia's purchase of their six-bed detached stone-built home, Fernleigh Mount, in the affluent Dore suburb of Sheffield. Much of the rest went towards their wedding, including £25,000 paid directly to Grantley Hall and over £10,000 for flowers.
Legal Arguments
Robert began his claim after demanding Sebastian sell his house, saying it had been their plan to "flip" it for a profit. In his written evidence, he said the first time he suspected his grandson wasn't intending to sell was when he learned of extensive refurbishments. "I did not understand why so much money was being spent on the property in circumstances where the plan was to flip it," he said. "I was extremely distressed and upset. I felt like I had been taken advantage of and deceived by [Sebastian] who had taken advantage of me in a vulnerable state."
Robert was supported by his son Richard and Richard's wife Helen, who both believed Sebastian had been taking advantage. Helen accused Sebastian and Olivia of living a "lavish lifestyle at Bob's expense," describing their wedding as "clearly a very expensive affair" for someone earning £40,000-a-year in a family business.
Judge's Ruling
But the couple fought back, insisting the house was a "family home" and other money was gifted for the wedding. Their lawyers suggested Richard and Helen were "being vindictive towards Sebastian and jealous that he had been Robert's favourite." Giving judgment, Judge Carter said: "Sebastian and Olivia both gave unchallenged evidence that Robert was treated as the guest of honour at the wedding - presumably because he had funded it."
The judge dismissed Robert's claim for repayment of wedding sums, stating: "In the absence of any evidence to support the contention that the monies advanced by Robert to pay for Sebastian's wedding were a loan and that Robert was expecting to be repaid, I dismiss his claim for repayment of those sums." He added: "It is reasonable, therefore, to approach the rest of Robert's case with considerable caution. If his claim can seek to recover from his grandson money which I have already found was given to him for his wedding, and for which he has not provided any good contemporaneous evidence, it is quite possible that he has revisited his previous indulgence of Sebastian and chosen to pursue this claim."
Concluding, Judge Carter said: "There was no agreement that the money would be repayable on demand or on the sale of Fernleigh Mount, nor was there an agreement that Fernleigh Mount was purchased to 'flip' in 2022 and that the profit would then go back to Robert. The claimant's claim must therefore be dismissed as I am satisfied that the advance was a gift to Sebastian to purchase a family home for him and his family. I also dismiss the claim for the other payments - they too were gifts by Robert to Sebastian, predominantly to pay for his wedding."
