A billionaire Russian gas pipe baron who was a judo partner of Vladimir Putin has won the latest round of a battle with his former ballet teacher ex-wife over ownership of a £27 million mansion in Surrey.
Arkady Rotenberg (69), a businessman, and Natalia Rotenberg (44) a former UK wife, were married in 2005. They divorced in Russia.
For six years, the former couple have been fighting in British courts over money.
Forbes estimates that Mr Rotenberg was a confidant of President Vladimir Putin and a business associate. His fortune is estimated at $2.5 Billion.
Boris Rotenberg and Boris Rotenberg are co-owners of the biggest construction firm for Russian gas pipelines, and electric power supply lines.
The UK High Court decided in 2019 that his ex should give the family house at Upper Ribsden Windlesham to him. He was a former teacher of ballet and gymnastics.
Arkady Rotenberg, a businessman, is pictured with his ex-wife Natalia Rotenberg from the UK. They were married in 2005, but divorced in Russia in 2013.
Rotenberg’s stunning house of 27,000 square feet, in which she lives together with their two children, has six acres of beautifully shaped grounds around Sunningdale.
The basement is 42ft long and features a games room, cinema, a wine cellar and state-of the-art catering. There are also staff quarters.
After finding out that the property is not Mr Rotenberg’s, three Court of Appeal Judges have overturned the ruling giving Mrs. Rotenberg the title to the mansion.
Mrs Rotenberg studied rhythmic gymnastics. She graduated from Gromov School of Music Arts. After moving to the UK, she became a teacher of ballet and opened her own school for children and Russian ballet. She also launched a clothing line.
A UK High Court judge ruled in 2019 that the ex should give the family home at Upper Ribsden Windlesham to his ex. (pictured), who was a former teacher of ballet and gymnast.
In the UK, an ex-divorce judge ruled that Mr Rotenberg’s house was being held in trust by Ravendark Holdings Ltd.
Before becoming one of Russia’s wealthiest businessmen, Mr Rotenberg had been training with Putin as a teacher in judo. They were childhood close friends.
Early skirmishes among Mr Rotenberg’s ex-wife led to a UK divorce judge deciding that Mr Rotenberg could have the house held in trust by Ravendark Holdings Ltd.
Ravendark, which isn’t owned by Rotenberg was borrowed large by one of his businesses to pay for the purchase.
Mister Justice Moor in 2019 ruled that the property should be handed over to Mrs Rotenberg.
Russian President Vladimir Putin is pictured right with Mr Rotenberg, as they participate in judo training at Yug Sport in Sochi (Russia) in February 2019.
Five years ago, Mrs Rotenberg (pictured below) started fighting for money in British courts together with her ex-husband.
Following the conclusion that Lord Justice McCombe had not been able to present the evidence necessary for him to determine that the residence was being held on trust by Mr Rotenberg, Lord Justice Moylan, and Lord Justice Newey reversed their decision at the Court of Appeal.
Mr Justice Moor’s finding that the mansion was held on trust was based on a £34.5m loan being made to Ravendark by the husband’s company, Olpon Investments Ltd, to fund the purchase.
Lord Justice Moylan, however, stated that the judge found there was a “legitimate loan arrangement” between the companies.
“As such, regardless of any other findings, his conclusion regarding the holding of the property on the resulting trust for him could not be sustained,” he said.
However, the lawyers representing the wife said that Mr Justice Moor’s findings were “so adversely to the husband…that justice will be served by upholding Judge’s determination about the beneficial owner of the property.”
Because her billionaire ex promised her it would be hers, they urged judges to instead rule in her favor and grant the house as a common intent constructive trust.
However, Lord Justice Moylan stated that, even though he found ‘a lot of force’ to that argument, ‘after considerable reflection, I have come up with the conclusion that this path is not properly open for us.
He added: ‘I do not consider that we are properly and fairly in a position to determine that question…not all of the constituent elements were sufficiently explored either evidentially or legally at the hearing below, in particular in respect of the issue of detrimentx.’
This case will be transferred for full hearing to determine who is the true owner of the property before Sir Andrew McFarlane (a date to be determined).