logo
Irish hotelier sues Qatari royals over alleged fraud in Beverly Hills deal

Irish hotelier sues Qatari royals over alleged fraud in Beverly Hills deal

As Irish hotelier Patrick McKillen tells it, he met the former emir of Qatar on a yacht in Doha to discuss a business opportunity in California, more than 8,000 miles away.
McKillen and Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani were discussing the purchase of a Beverly Hills hotel, which McKillen said he committed to managing and redeveloping.
Now that hotel — the Maybourne Beverly Hills — is at the center of a civil racketeering complaint filed in the Central District of California on Tuesday, in which McKillen accuses Qatari royals of orchestrating 'a global scheme' to defraud him and his company of hundreds of millions of dollars for work completed on several luxury properties.
In the lawsuit, McKillen, who reportedly co-owns a whiskey distillery with U2 frontman Bono, said he and his team 'undertook a massive redevelopment effort' on the Beverly Hills hotel — where rooms go for more than $1,000 a night — over a two-year period, but were not paid millions of dollars allegedly owed for the work done.
McKillen, a citizen of Ireland and the United Kingdom, brought the complaint against senior members of the royal family, including Hamad bin Khalifa; and Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim bin Jaber Al Thani, the former prime minister known as 'HBJ'; as well as the family's agents, representatives and controlled businesses.
In the complaint, which encompasses claims already being litigated in courts around the world, McKillen alleges that the schemes against him and his company, Hume Street Management Consultants Limited, 'are part of a years' long pattern of illegal racketeering orchestrated by the Qatari royals and are in line with a history of illicit, lawless actions.'
McKillen's lawyers declined to comment.
'This is the latest of many vacuous claims made by Paddy McKillen and associated parties across multiple jurisdictions, all of which are either on-going or have been struck out by the courts,' the Qatari-owned Maybourne Hotel Group said in a statement. 'As with the other claims, we will contest this latest claim and prove the allegations to be entirely false.'
The federal lawsuit filed in Los Angeles is the latest action taken by McKillen in his long-running legal dispute with the Qatari royal family, a conflict that has made headlines around the world. He has filed actions in the U.S., France and the United Kingdom.
The Maybourne Beverly Hills is also the subject of a breach of contract lawsuit that was filed by McKillen's company in Los Angeles County Superior Court in 2022. That court denied a motion by the company that owns the hotel to force McKillen's company into arbitration. The decision is under appeal.
'It appears that Mr. McKillen would prefer to litigate in the press rather than continue the actions he initiated in the United States, UK, and France and await their outcome,' Jason D. Russell, who is representing Hamad bin Jassim in California actions, said in an email. 'Our client remains confident that these claims, like the myriad others he has filed, will be found to lack merit in a court or by an arbitrator.'
Earlier this year, the High Court in London set aside McKillen's company's permission to serve a claim on Hamad bin Jassim outside of the jurisdiction, finding it had failed to show a real prospect of success, according to court documents. The claim, for around £3.6 million (about $4.8 million), was tied the development of a private home in London for Hamad bin Jassim. The company's appeal was refused earlier this month, according to British court records.
McKillen was also convicted in Paris earlier this year of being physically and verbally aggressive to a bailiff who was in his apartment in the city because of the alleged nonpayment of a loan to the Luxembourg-based Quintet Private Bank.
McKillen's lawyers told the Irish Times that their client 'vigorously denies any violence or any wrongdoing' against the bailiff and claimed the allegations against him were 'false.' McKillen, who was reportedly fined €10,000 (about $11,377) over the incident, has appealed the conviction.
By the time the Qatari royal family approached McKillen about the California hotel in 2019, he said he had been working on projects with them for years.
According to the federal complaint filed in California, in 2004, McKillen acquired shares in a group of luxury hotels that came to be known as the Maybourne Hotel Group. Despite later selling his shares in the group to a company owned by Hamad bin Jassim, McKillen said he continued to manage and redevelop the Maybourne Hotel Group and its hotels at the direction of the royals.
Hamad bin Khalifa later acquired an interest in the Maybourne Hotel Group, according to the complaint.
McKillen said he and his company had been tasked with the management and redevelopment of the refurbishment of a Manhattan mansion owned by Hamad bin Jassim in 2018; the construction and development of a new Parisian hotel on the site of the historic Îlot Saint-Germain building in 2019; and the management and redevelopment of the newly branded Maybourne Beverly Hills hotel in 2019.
McKillen alleges that for each of those projects, the Qatari royals told him he would be compensated through fees for services performed, but that at some point, 'the Qatari Royals decided, in secret, that they would not, in fact, be compensating Mr. McKillen or HSMC.' McKillen alleged in the complaint that he and his company were strung along 'under false representations' that they would be paid.
The complaint detailed the October 2019 meeting on a yacht in Doha, Qatar, between McKillen and Hamad bin Khalifa to discuss the opportunity for the royal family to acquire the California hotel, then known as the Montage Beverly Hills.
McKillen said he presented a vision for the hotel to Hamad bin Khalifa and 'gave his commitment to manage and strategically redevelop' it. A holding company owned by Hamad bin Khalifa purchased the hotel later that year, according to the complaint.
In the complaint, McKillen said a representative of the family confirmed that he and his company would be compensated with fees paid for work performed on the hotel. During the next two years, McKillen said he and his team transitioned the hotel to the Maybourne brand and led the hotel's development and management.
In July 2021, according to the complaint, McKillen submitted a fee proposal to an advisor to the Al Thani family, stating that his company was owed $6 million in project management fees on an annual basis, to be paid quarterly, from January 2020 to January 2025. That proposal was 'met with stonewalling by the Qatari Royals,' the complaint alleges. After months passed with no payment, McKillen said, he wrote a letter to Hamad bin Khalifa and Hamad bin Jassim telling them about the refusal to pay him fees owed and stating that he could no longer work on the project.
McKillen later sent an additional invoice for $12 million in project management fees for work performed in California in 2020 and 2021, according to the complaint. He alleges that none of those fees had been paid.
The Qatari royals are facing a separate legal battle over the Maybourne Riviera, after French authorities sued them for allegedly breaching planning and environmental regulations and illegally building on land exposed to 'seismic risks,' according to an Irish Times article. The newspaper reported that, at a recent hearing, a representative for the Al Thani family blamed McKillen.
McKillen told that news outlet that the alleged breaches occurred two years after he was fired from the project in April 2022.
'The damage was done after we left,' he told the outlet. 'The French state isn't suing me, it's suing the Qataris.'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Single player could become the UK's record National Lottery winner on Tuesday
Single player could become the UK's record National Lottery winner on Tuesday

Yahoo

time3 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Single player could become the UK's record National Lottery winner on Tuesday

A single EuroMillions player could become the UK's record-making National Lottery winner on Tuesday with the jackpot rising to £210 million. The EuroMillions jackpot is capped once it has reached 250 million Euros – an estimated £210 million. If there are no winners on Tuesday, it will now stay at 250 million Euros for a further four draws until it must be won in the fifth draw. In the 'Must Be Won' draw, if no ticket matches all five main numbers and two Lucky Stars, the jackpot prize will roll down into the prize tier where there is at least one winner – likely to be five main numbers and one Lucky Star. A single UK winner would instantly become the nation's largest-ever National Lottery winner. They would knock into second place the anonymous winner of a £195 million prize in 2022. It follows an Irish family syndicate claiming a EuroMillions jackpot worth 250 million euros (£216 million) on June 17. The jackpot had reached the maximum amount on June 6 after rolling over several times. Andy Carter, senior winners' advisor at Allwyn, said: 'Tuesday's jackpot has the ability to transform not just the winner's life, but the life of the friends and family around them. 'So, make sure you get a ticket to be in with a chance of banking Britain's biggest ever win.' Players should get their EuroMillions tickets – either in store or online – before 7.30pm on Tuesday.

Andrew Tate sues Meta and TikTok for ‘deplatforming' him in 2022
Andrew Tate sues Meta and TikTok for ‘deplatforming' him in 2022

NBC News

time8 hours ago

  • NBC News

Andrew Tate sues Meta and TikTok for ‘deplatforming' him in 2022

Controversial influencers Andrew and Tristan Tate are suing Meta and TikTok for banning their social media accounts in 2022. Romanian authorities have charged the Tate brothers, who are dual U.S.-British citizens and former boxers, with human trafficking. Andrew Tate is also charged with rape. In Britain, both brothers were charged with rape and other crimes, prosecutors said in May. They both have denied any wrongdoing. The brothers are prominent figures in the 'manosphere,' a loose network of online communities known to elevate extreme interpretations of masculinity that are often hostile to women. Andrew Tate, in particular, gained notoriety on social media, where he was also widely criticized for spreading misogynistic rhetoric to his millions of followers. In two lawsuits filed last week in Los Angeles County Superior Court, the Tate brothers accuse TikTok and Meta of defaming and unlawfully 'deplatforming' them by removing their social media accounts. The two were banned in 2022 from Twitter, TikTok, YouTube and Meta-owned Instagram and Facebook for violating the platforms' community guidelines. They were reinstated on Twitter (now X) after Elon Musk took over ownership, but they appear not to have returned to other platforms. The lawsuits focus on TikTok, Instagram and Facebook. They do not mention YouTube or its parent company, Google. Attorneys for the Tates, as well as representatives for Meta and TikTok, did not respond to requests for further comment Monday. The lawsuits, which are largely identical, claim the removals of their accounts were 'not an isolated enforcement action grounded in neutral application of its Terms of Use, rather, it was the culmination of a coordinated campaign to suppress, silence, and destroy the reputations and livelihoods of two controversial but law-abiding men.' The brothers also allege that the 'deplatforming' was done without notice or explanation and that it violated contractual agreements and stripped them of their main sources of revenue. Their brand and business model relied heavily on their social media engagement, the lawsuits say, and their removals from the platforms led to 'substantial and irreplaceable financial loss and damage.' TikTok and Meta 'inflicted' 'substantial financial, reputational, and emotional harm,' according to the lawsuit. The brothers said they took legal action 'to ensure that even the most powerful technology companies remain accountable when they act as instruments of government censorship and suppress constitutionally protected speech in violation of federal and state law,' the lawsuits say. Andrew Tate, 38, and Tristan Tate, 37, reside in Romania and Dubai, according to the lawsuits. They briefly left Romania to go to the United States after a travel ban on them was lifted. They made an appearance at UFC 313 in Las Vegas in March after they touched down in Florida in February. In May, the U.K.'s Crown Prosecution Service charged both brothers with rape, human trafficking and other crimes, leading Romanian courts to issue an order to extradite them to the U.K. once their court case there ends. Florida also opened a criminal investigation against them this year after they visited the state. In 2023, they filed a defamation suit in Palm Beach County, Florida, Circuit Court against people they claim provided false evidence to Romanian authorities and conspired to deceive officials to have them wrongfully imprisoned. A woman countersued in February this year, claiming the brothers tried to lure her into a webcam sex trafficking ring. The Tates' lawsuits note that while they were 'arrested in Romania and placed under house arrest in connection with criminal investigations, neither was, or has been, convicted of human trafficking or sexual exploitation.' 'Despite this, TikTok and other actors repeatedly invoked these allegations to justify censorship and reputational damage, again with no opportunity for Plaintiffs to question or dispel such false and malicious accusations,' the lawsuits say. The platforms enabled defamation of the brothers by 'refusing to clarify or support' their reasons for banning their accounts, thus 'allow[ing] widespread media narratives to suggest criminality,' according to the lawsuits. Andrew Tate has previously pushed back against the criticisms of his online presence, telling NBC News in November 2022 that he is playing an 'online character.' He said at the time that he makes 'many videos praising women' and that his coaching involves teaching men 'to avoid toxic people as a whole.' Tate said he tells his audience to avoid 'low value people,' including 'toxic men.' Andrew Tate wrote Sunday on X that he is shelling out money (he says '400,000,000 of personal funds') to battle the platforms and those who tried to 'cancel' him, including 'mainstream media across Australia UK and USA,' as well as 'every single girl who lied about me.' 'It's good vs evil and I will lose my entire fortune in this fight,' he wrote to his nearly 11 million followers. 'I'm happy to go broke and live on the street trying to beat The Matrix.' The brothers seek more than $50 million in compensatory damages from each company, according to the respective lawsuits.

The serious trend behind MSNBC's silly new name
The serious trend behind MSNBC's silly new name

Vox

time10 hours ago

  • Vox

The serious trend behind MSNBC's silly new name

is a senior politics correspondent at Vox, covering the White House, elections, and political scandals and investigations. He's worked at Vox since the site's launch in 2014, and before that, he worked as a research assistant at the New Yorker's Washington, DC, bureau. Goodbye MSBNC, and hello 'MS NOW.' In an announcement that has triggered widespread befuddlement and mockery, the progressive cable news network is getting rebranded. The new name isn't meant to call to mind Microsoft or the honorific 'Ms.' Instead, in the style of congressional bill-naming, MS NOW is purportedly an acronym for the following mouthful: 'My Source for News, Opinion, and the World.' Underneath this seemingly silly story, though, are currents of major change — and fear — in the mainstream media. Today, Explained Understand the world with a daily explainer, plus the most compelling stories of the day. Email (required) Sign Up By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Notice . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. Because both MSNBC and its fellow political news network CNN are meeting the same fate; they're being jettisoned by the big corporate bethemoths that currently own them. Those corporate behemoths — Comcast owns MSNBC, while Warner Bros. owns CNN — have legitimate business reasons for making this change. Each is offloading these political news channels, as well as various other cable networks, to a new separate company, called by some a 'SpinCo' (spin-off company) and by others a 'ShitCo' (no explanation needed). This is because cable news is viewed as a declining business. Yet there's another clear implication. President Donald Trump loathes both MSNBC and CNN, and his administration has been willing and eager to wage personal and political vendettas against their corporate owners. Take, for instance, how Paramount had to grovel before Trump because he was annoyed at Paramount-owned CBS. The Federal Communications Commission held up Paramount's merger deal until the company agreed to pay a $16 million settlement in a bogus lawsuit Trump had brought against 60 Minutes. So now, with these spinoffs, Comcast and Warner Bros. will no longer have to worry about being punished by the federal government for MSNBC and CNN's coverage. To be clear: Comcast's spin-off of MSNBC and other cable properties was already in the works before Trump won his second term. And there's obviously no political motivation behind Comcast ditching its other cable properties, like the USA Network, SYFY, Oxygen, the Golf Channel, CNBC, and E! (Comcast is keeping NBC News and Universal Studios.) But since Trump began his second term, the company's thinking has apparently evolved on one point: whether MSNBC can keep its name. Back in January, the new CEO of MSNBC's SpinCo, Mark Lazarus, said that MSNBC would keep its name after the spin-off. So the announcement Monday of the new MS NOW name was a change of plan. This would, of course, create more obvious distance between whatever 'MS NOW' is up to and the existing NBC media empire. CNBC, in contrast, will get to keep its name despite being spun off. We don't know whether that's because they're less likely to displease Trump, less likely to cause problems for NBC's brand, or some other reason. What we do know is that, this year, Trump has normalized the weaponization of the government against corporations who have displeased him with shocking speed. For now, at least, this has to be part of companies' strategic calculations. Placating the president is the new cost of doing business in the United States of America.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store