<img src="https://www.lindaikejisblog.com/photos/shares/TELEMMGLPICT000432004607_17522226872820_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqqVzuuqpFlyLIwiB6NTmJwW38cYd17maF9as37JmLZ1E_1752233100.webp">The son of a toy-making tycoon has won the right to half of his familys 14.5 million fortune after a bitter inheritance battle with his half-brother, who tried to disinherit him using DNA evidence.Edward Marcus pictured above and Jonathan Marcus pictured below, became embroiled in a court dispute after it emerged that Edward was the result of an affair between his mother, Patricia, and Sydney Glossop, a lawyer.Jonathans legal team argued that Edward, a solicitor, should not share in the inheritance left by their father, Stuart Marcus, because he was not Stuarts biological son.<img src="https://www.lindaikejisblog.com/photos/shares/TELEMMGLPICT000430136727_17522227047350_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqqVzuuqpFlyLIwiB6NTmJwfSVWeZ_vEN7c6bHu2jJnT8_1752233121.webp">However, this week the High Court rejected Jonathans case. Justice Sir Anthony Mann ruled that since Stuart had always believed Edward was his son and intended for him to benefit, Edward was entitled to his share.Stuart Marcus began by selling wooden dollhouse kits above a small toy shop in east London, eventually building a network of companies valued at 14.5 million. Before his death at age 86 in February 2020, he placed 43 percent of his business assets into a family trust for the benefit of his children and their spouses.In 2023, Jonathan discovered through DNA testing that Edward was not Stuarts biological child, learning that his mothers one-night affair decades earlier had led to Edwards birth. Patricia had privately told Edward about his paternity 14 years earlier.Jonathans lawyer, Thomas Braithwaite, argued that the term children in the trust documents referred strictly to biological offspring, meaning Edward should be excluded.But Justice Mann disagreed, finding that Stuart had always treated both boys as his biological sons.He would naturally have described them as his biological children, and as far as he and everyone else was concerned apart from his wife and possibly Edwards biological father that is exactly what they were, the judge said.In that context, Stuart chose to use the word children, which, in the real world, described both Edward and Jonathan perfectly. This settlement was intended to operate in Stuarts real world, where Edward was his child.The judge concluded that Edward had always been treated for practical, familial, and all other purposes as Stuarts son and that Stuarts intention was clear: Edward was to be included in the trust.The post <a href="http://www.lindaikejisblog.com/2025/7/lovechild-wins-right-to-share-ps14m-fortune-from-fathers-business-after-legal-battle-with-brother.html">Lovechild wins right to share 14m fortune from fathers business after legal battle with Brother</a> appeared first on <a href="https://www.lindaikejisblog.com">Linda Ikeji Blog</a>.
Click here to read full news..
