The former partner of a fashion guru is engaged in a bitter High Court battle with his family over a £1 million will. Tibor Matyas was the 'romantic and business partner' of Chris Liu, the man-bag designer, at the time of Liu's death from cancer in 2017 at age 47.
The pair collaborated on their label Chris and Tibor, with Matyas handling management and marketing. Upon Liu's death, Matyas inherited a jointly owned £470,000 London apartment and a 25% share of another flat in the city, while the remainder of the estate went to Liu's family in China.
Now, Matyas is suing for 'reasonable provision' from the will, asserting he was financially dependent on Liu. He told a judge that one reason he cannot work is due to walking his dog. Liu, a London College of Fashion graduate, began as a womenswear designer selling to high-end outlets like Harvey Nichols, with celebrity clients reportedly including Kylie Minogue and Sade.
Matyas and Liu both worked as design consultants for Burberry before launching their man-bag label in 2005. The High Court heard they purchased a property portfolio including flats in Kinetica Apartments, Thornbury Close, and Atkins Square, all in Dalston, east London.
The £470,000 Thornbury Close flat automatically passed to Matyas as it was jointly owned, but the other two properties were held solely in Liu's name and entered his estate. In his 2015 will, Liu left almost everything to his parents and brother, except a quarter share of the £400,000 Atkins Square property to Matyas.
A seven-year legal battle then erupted between Matyas, Liu's parents De Heng Liu and Xuan Rong Yang, and his brother Pu Liu. Initially, Matyas and the brother were joint executors but were replaced by a professional executor.
Matyas is seeking a judge's ruling under the 1975 Inheritance Act for 'reasonable financial provision', claiming he will struggle with daily expenses without more money. Liu's family, who have not travelled to the UK for the trial, argue that most of the funds for property purchases came from them. The estate administrator, Peter Daniel, also opposes the claim.
Matyas told the court how he has struggled to restart his career after Liu's death, despite previous work as a chef. In written evidence, he stated: 'I was financially and emotionally dependent on Chris. I was maintained by him and financially dependent on him.'
Deputy Judge Andrew Scott questioned Matyas about his employment prospects: 'You seem to be an intelligent, capable and together person now and it's not entirely clear to me why you can't find employment?' Matyas replied: 'I am also alone and looking after my dog and I have to take out the dog.'
Aidan Briggs, representing Matyas, noted that the dog adds to his financial needs, costing £3,800 annually for food, vet bills, and kennels. Matyas said he is trying to return to entrepreneurship, which takes time, and at nearly 50, finding work is a struggle. 'The only employment I can find is low-end and would be full-time, which would take up all my time,' he said. 'There would be no exit from that circle because I would be working for survival.'
The court heard Matyas has significant debts, including legal bills, and seeks a regular income stream from the estate rather than a lump sum. He also argues an alternative case that the properties should be shared equally based on a 'constructive trust', despite being in Liu's sole name.
Matyas insisted he and Liu always understood the properties were jointly owned and lived 'as though they were a married couple'. He said: 'Our joint income originated from the same source, neither Chris nor I had any independent business ventures.' He claimed funds for Kinetica Apartments came from their company via a 'circuitous route'.
Matyas added that the property was registered solely in Liu's name to placate his family in China, as Liu 'had never been open about his sexuality' and they believed Matyas was merely his business partner. 'My name couldn't be on the property due to pressure from Chris' family,' he said. 'Chris asked me to allow the property to be registered in his sole name so that his family would stop questioning him.'
The same situation occurred with the Atkins Square flat, according to Matyas. However, Timothy Evans, barrister for the estate administrator, argued that the property purchases were funded by Liu's family. He claimed cash for the Kinetica flat 'derived from payments made to the deceased from China'.
Evans said Matyas must 'show on the balance of probabilities that he lived with the deceased as though they were a married couple for the whole of the period from 10 April 2015' and that the will failed to make reasonable financial provision. He noted that Matyas already received the whole of Thornbury Close and a quarter share in Atkins Square.
Liu's estate was valued at around £1,061,368, but much could be consumed by legal costs. The judge has reserved his ruling.
