Earl of Yarmouth who was disinherited by his parents over his choice of bride faces £1.3m bill after losing acrimonious legal battle over control of £85m estate

TThe Earl of Yarmouth is facing a £1.3 million legal bill after losing a bitter court battle against his aristocratic family over the management of his £85 million ancestral estate.

Despite claiming he was ‘open to a compromise’ with his parents after taking them to court, William Seymour, 31, now has to pay legal fees after suing and losing for control of the family’s 6,000-acre Ragley estate in Warwickshire.

Lord Yarmouth has been fighting with his parents, the Marquess and Marchioness of Hertford, since 2018 because they objected to his wedding to former Goldman Sachs banker Kelsey Wells (now known as Lady Yarmouth).

The High Court heard he took ‘little interest’ in running the estate until 2017, but ‘began to assert himself’ after meeting Ms Wells.

Lord Yarmouth had been told that when he turned 30 he would inherit property, including the stately 110-room Palladian mansion his parents called home.

At the age of just 21, he had acquired more than £4.2 million in land and property.

But his father, Lord Hertford, 66, decided to disinherit his son after they had a disastrous falling out during his marriage.

He said the decision ‘coincided with his marriage, but Kelsey was not the real reason.’

In his witness statement to the court, Lord Hertford said: ‘William asked me to confirm that I would hand over Ragley Hall to him when I turned 30.

‘It was as if he had promised Kelsey they would move to Ragley Hall, he was insistent.

Lord and Lady Yarmouth attend High Court hearing into the management of their ancestral estate Ragley Hall

‘I am disappointed by William’s failure. I am proud that even though he went to university, he made a mistake and could not graduate.

‘William has not acquired the profession or the qualifications or experience to take over the running of Ragley Hall.’

In his statement to the court, Lord Yarmouth claimed that his family had such a “deep animosity” towards Lady Yarmouth, 39, that on the wedding day, Lord Hertford told his son: “You can still cancel, we’ll send everyone home, just say no.”

Lord Yarmouth then took legal action to remove the trustees responsible for administering the estate, including his father’s cousin and a long-standing family friend, whom he considered to be siding with his parents and ‘stable’ against him.

But earlier this year High Court Judge Master James Brightwell rejected his claim, saying the trustees had done nothing wrong.

This week the family returned to court and Lord Yarmouth’s lawyers argued that despite losing the case, he should not have to pay the seven-figure legal costs of the case and that these should be covered by the family trust.

But Master Brightwell dismissed his case, leaving him facing a bill of around £1.3 million, comprising £717,000 claimed by the trustees, £330,000 claimed by his family, plus his own lawyers’ costs of over £300,000.

Paul Burton, for Lord Yarmouth, said this week his client should not have to pay the full costs, arguing: ‘It shouldn’t be as simple as ‘You lose, you pay the costs’.

He told the court he felt Lord Yarmouth had to sue.

The legacy of Ragley Hall in Warwickshire was at the center of bitter court dispute

‘This was a case about relationships. “This was a situation where trust and confidence was shaken,” he said.

However, Master Brightwell rejected this claim and added: ‘It is undoubtedly a painful matter for all involved that family history has become a matter of public debate.

‘In principle, both the family defendants and the trustee defendants reasonably incurred a range of costs.’

The judge ordered Lord Yarmouth to make an advance payment of £500,000.

The exact amount he must pay will now be assessed by a specialist costs judge unless the warring parties can reach agreement in advance.

After Master Brightwell rejected the trustees’ claim to be evicted from the estate, Lord Yarmouth, who runs the elderflower liqueur distillery St Maur with his wife on part of the estate, said he was keen to mend ties with his parents.

‘My aim was to ensure the protection of my family’s interests in the foundations and, in particular, to ensure the well-being of my children as beneficiaries,’ he said.

‘I come to court with the sincere hope of finding a fair and lasting solution to a worrying situation.

‘Although it is painful for both parties, my wife Kelsey and I are open to reconciliation with my family. We made this clear privately to Lord and Lady Hertford.’

The family traces its roots back to Henry VIII’s third wife, Jane Seymour.

Ragley Hall in Alcester was built in the 1680s and is set within 450 acres of landscaped gardens, 4,500 acres of farmland and 1,000 acres of woodland.

It has been permanently occupied by the Marquess and Marquess of Hertford since the 1960s, when Lord Hertford’s father made it his main residence.