After spending £60,000 in a legal battle over a suitcase of family photos with “no monetary worth,” a family of celebrity hoteliers was branded as “absolutely insane” by the judge.
The venerable five-star American Colony Hotel in Jerusalem, founded in 1902, has hosted guests throughout the years including Lawrence of Arabia, Winston Churchill, and Bob Dylan.
Judith Andersson and her sister-in-law Diane Ward are joint proprietors of the hotel.
The in-law sisters are currently embroiled in a contentious legal battle about what ought to happen to a suitcase of family photos.
Ms. Andersson, 76, asserts that her mother, Frieda, who passed away in 1993 at the age of 77 in Richmond, west London, wanted the albums to be shared by the siblings and passed down when each one passed away.
The eldest child, Tim, took the suitcase of priceless photo albums and papers when their mother passed away, and he preserved them until his death in 2020. Ms. Andersson referred to them as a “archive.”
But Ms. Andersson is currently bringing a lawsuit against her brother’s widow for the bag, which was left on the courtroom floor for the duration of the two-day hearing last week.
Her brother’s ‘twisted payback’ for an earlier inheritance dispute, which was centered on claims that she owed her mother money before she passed away, is what caused his family to refuse to let her have it now, according to her.
Ms. Andersson contends that because both of her brothers have passed away, the luggage should now be given to her in accordance with her mother’s wishes in a lawsuit that has already accrued £60,000 in legal fees.
The court was informed that the contested images and papers had “no monetary worth” and that Judge Nigel Gerald previously labeled the issue as “absolutely insane” in a hearing before another judge.
The expensive court struggle involving a purple bag filled with family photos and other memorabilia that is currently taking place at Central London County Court is only the most recent in a string of legal issues that have plagued the once-close-knit family.
In Jerusalem, where her great-grandparents Horatio Gates Spafford and Anna Spafford founded the American Colony in the late 19th century, in a former palace that is now the American Colony Hotel, Frieda, the matriarch, was born.
The ‘colony’ was made up of devoted American and Swedish Christians who were well-known for their charitable work with locals in the divided Middle East, regardless of their religion.
The hotel rose to prominence among Western tourists and is now regarded as an “oasis of impartiality” in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
It calls itself one of Jerusalem’s “best boutique hotels” and a “home away from home for discerning travelers.”
In her colorful life, Frieda worked as a nurse and lived in Israel, Cyprus, Nigeria, and New York. She passed away in 1993 while residing in Hampton Wick, Richmond.
She bequeathed her estate to Ms. Andersson, her three children, and her brothers John and Tim Ward.
Ms. Andersson, who resides in the US, however, informed Judge Mark Raeside that the “archive” in the bag was a “unique” collection of assets that needed to be handled differently from the rest of their mother’s estate.
She claimed that although they had decided that all three of them would own it, Tim would first be the owner and that it would eventually pass to each sibling when the others died while still being a part of the family.
The judge heard her say, “It was specifically planned that the last one of us living would have the archive…that the archive would remain with one of us.”
Oliver Ingham, her attorney, stressed that even though the luggage has “no monetary value,” it is a “invaluable storehouse of her family history” and that it is not a “trifling” issue.
In addition, he added that the archive may be of historical significance given the family connections to the British presence in Israel.
He claimed that although Tim initially received ownership of the archive, the siblings had agreed that any of them might request its transfer at any time.
He told Judge Raeside that despite this, Tim had refused to give it to his sister when she requested it, and after his death, Mrs. Ward’s widow had similarly resisted giving it to anyone.
It is obvious that Mrs. Andersson has spent the better part of 29 years trying to access the archive, her lawyer continued.
This person’s long history of pursuing this goal “clearly suggests that she has always regarded herself to be entitled to access and that she cares very deeply about the archive,” according to the report.”
However, Mrs. Ward, 77, who lives close to Northampton, claimed that the three siblings had ever made an arrangement to share the case’s contents because images couldn’t be physically exchanged.
Elissa Da Costa-Waldman, her attorney, stated: “It is evident that personal effects such as are claimed here cannot physically be shared equally and the siblings would have had to make decisions about the partition of such items.”
This is the reason why Frieda chose not to fill out a memorandum of wishes (pertaining to the archive), preferring that her children select those objects on their own.
Tim chose the documents and pictures kept in the luggage after the siblings talked about their mother’s belongings and decided what each would take after Frieda passed away, she added.
She claimed that it was obvious that the Ward siblings got together to decide what they wanted from their late mother’s possessions.
The case’s contents, according to Mrs. Da Costa-Waldman, have “sentimental significance” to everyone, and Mrs. Ward tried to end the conflict by offering to donate copies or originals of certain items.
Judge Raeside concluded the two-day hearing by stating that it was “improbable and unrealistic” that Judith Andersson would have consented to her brother Tim being given the entire estate to himself.
He stated that there was an understanding that the archive would not be divided and that Tim Ward had maintained the images and papers in trust for the benefit of the three siblings.
He did, however, postpone discussion of the specifics of what will now happen to the baggage until a subsequent hearing later this month.
Although it is believed that the case has cost £60,000 in legal fees, the judge will ultimately decide who is responsible.