A sibling's "bitter feud" over their father's £100million fortune has led to a brother launching a bid to have his sister jailed.
Multimillionaire businesswoman Louise Reeves was branded "ruthless and materialistic" by a judge during a legal war with her brother Bill Reeves after their tycoon father Kevin died and left her most of his cash and property empire.
Bill, 48, was cut from his father's will in 2014, meaning he missed out on part of his father's fortune.
But that will was overturned following a High Court trial last year when a judge found that his "ruthless" sister Louise, 36, had "engineered" the making of the document, "pulling the wool over (her dad's) eyes", so he signed a will he didn't understand.
Now, Louise, a Toni and Guy stylist, faces jail time if found guilty for contempt of court, after her brother and his son Ryan McKinnon called for her to be sentenced for lying in court statements.
In a contempt of court application, lawyers said Louise and her dad's solicitor Daniel Curnock had "deliberately concealed" how well they knew each other before Kevin's final will was made.
This week, Judge Clare Ambrose, sitting at the High Court in London, refused a bid by Louise to delay proceedings and ruled the contempt application made against both Louise and Mr Curnock should be considered by the court as soon as possible.
"The contempt application questions as to whether the statements made were made dishonestly and knowingly," she said.
"There are potentially important questions as to the consequences of dishonest statements about the drawing up of wills and the appropriate sanction for solicitors and beneficiaries."
Both Louise and Mr Curnock deny any dishonesty and are set to fight Bill and Ryan's application for permission to bring proceedings against them.
Louise is also planning to take her case to the European Court of Human Rights, claiming that her right to a fair hearing was violated at the original trial.
During the battle between brother and sister in November 2021, the court heard that their dad, Rolls Royce-driving property tycoon Kevin Reeves, built up a vast personal fortune despite humble beginnings, having been left as an orphan child at a convent and quitting school aged just 12.
He had four children, but his final will left 80 per cent of his millions to his Toni and Guy-trained daughter, Louise, when he died, aged 71, in 2019. The rest was to go to her half-sister Lisa Murray.
His death sparked a "bitter feud" after his second son Bill, backed by grandson Ryan, claimed that Louise had bullied Kevin into changing his will to leave Bill almost nothing.
Bill Reeves described his sister as "Jekyll and Hyde" and someone who "likes money and flash things", before claiming she was behind the reason her dad cut him out of his will.
He told the court he enjoyed a great relationship with his dad, even offering to donate a lung to him when he was ill.
There was no reason why Kevin should leave him with so little in his last will made in 2014, he said.
Ruling on the case in January this year, Mr Justice Michael Green rejected the claim that Louise had bullied her dad, but said she had "pulled the wool over his eyes" so he did not understand what was in the will.
"I believe that Louise is a risk taker and she can be manipulative. She knows what she wants and she knows how to get it," he said.
"I believe that she was prepared to take the risk, because the prize was so great, of being found out by the deceased in relation to the 2014 will and she would have taken the consequences."
The judge also found that, in telling the court they had not met until after the 2014 will was made, Louise and her dad's solicitor Mr Curnock "deliberately sought to conceal the full extent of their interactions in relation to the preparation of the 2014 will".
He said emails had come to light "that indicated communications between them in relation to the 2014 will and that they had met on 11 December 2013 when Mr Curnock attended the deceased's offices for a meeting."
There had also been 17 text messages between the two on just one day in December 2013, he said.
Overturning the 2014 will meant Kevin's fortune would be split under the terms of an earlier 2012 will, which gave 10 per cent shares to his estranged son Mark's two kids, Ryan and Ria McKinnon, with the remaining 80 per cent split equally between Bill, Louise and Lisa.
Louise and Mr Curnock now face bids to have them jailed for contempt of court, with lawyers for Bill and Ryan arguing that the case should be decided "sooner the better".
"This case was about a lot of money, and it attracted a great deal of attention," said Ryan's barrister, Clifford Darton KC, at the High Court this week.
"There has to be a deterrent, particularly on solicitors or parties seeking to make a significant commercial advantage to give false evidence on events leading up to the making of a will.
"There is a public interest in getting this matter resolved and resolved quickly."
However, Louise's barrister Elizabeth Jones KC said she denied being dishonest about previous contact with Mr Curnock in order to conceal how the will was made.
She simply did not remember meeting him, she said.
"Our case is that Louise didn't cause [her father] to enter into a will he didn't know about," she told the judge.
"She had no incentive to, and didn't, lie. It's quite simple."
And she said the contempt application should be delayed to allow Louise to take her complaints about the will case to the European Court of Human Rights first.
She said that Louise had effectively been found to have "defrauded" her dad, but no allegation of that had been put to her during the trial.
That was in breach of her human right to a fair trial under Article 6 of the Human Rights Convention and she is taking action against the UK government because of it, said the barrister.
It would therefore be wrong to go ahead with the contempt of court case if the original judgment might ultimately be impugned by the European court, she argued.
"The contempt application is made on the basis that Louise and Mr Curnock both lied about their previous relationship and about when they first met each other," she said.
"The judge found they lied about that in order to conceal the fact that Louise had caused her father to sign a will that he didn't know the contents of."
Whether that judgment was correct would be crucial to whether she should be jailed, since it would form a central plank of the contempt case against her, she added.
"If Louise didn't in fact cause her father to make a will he didn't know the contents of, if she didn't defraud him, then there was no reason for her to lie," she argued.
"You can't separate the two. It is absolutely material to the question of whether she lied to know whether, in fact, she caused him to sign a will he didn't understand."
Rejecting the adjournment application, Judge Ambrose said it was in the public interest for the application for permission to take contempt proceedings to go ahead sooner rather than later.
The case will return to court later this month for a decision on whether the contempt case will go forward.
