A high-end property developer sued by a super-rich heiress for selling her a luxury mansion “infested by millions of moths” has been handed a final court bill of over £36.5m after losing the case.
Iya Patarkatsishvili – the daughter of a Georgian multi-billionaire – bought sumptuous Horbury Villa, Notting Hill, with her husband in May 2019, having forked out £32.5m for the early Victorian pile, which boasts a pool and spa, gym, wine room, library and cinema.
It also had a “snoring room” specially kitted out to guarantee a peaceful night’s sleep.
But a few days after she and her dentist husband Dr Yevhen Hunyak moved in, Ms Patarkatsishvili said she spotted the first signs of a winged “infestation,” sparking the couple’s multi-million pound claim against seller, William Woodward-Fisher, when she innocently told her husband: “there’s a moth flying around here”.
Earlier this month, a High Court judge found former champion rower Mr Woodward-Fisher, 68, had given “false” answers about the state of his home in pre-sale enquiries and failed “honestly to disclose” the “serious infestation” of moths.
Ruling in the couple’s favour, Mr Justice Fancourt found that they had been led into the purchase by Mr Woodward-Fisher’s “fraudulent misrepresentation” about the state of the property.
He ordered that they be allowed to hand back the property and get a refund with Mr Woodward Fisher in line to pay out around £30m to the couple.
But today, after a fresh hearing, Mr Woodward-Fisher’s total bill for the case was set at more than £36.5m.
The order will see the couple due a refund of the £32.5m purchase price, less about £6.4m for their five years in the house, but with interest and further compensation making Mr Woodward-Fisher’s total bill much higher.
Awarding the couple about £4.7m in interest on the £26m they are due on the purchase price, Mr Justice Fancourt said: “The monies returned should be of the same value that they had in May 2019.”
The judge said as well as the refund and about £5.1m damages, Mr Woodward-Fisher would also have to pay the couple’s lawyers’ bills, with £750,000 up front towards a total which could reach £2.9m after assessment.
The costs were ordered after the couple’s barrister John McGhee KC argued: “This is not just a case of fraud, it’s a case of persisting in that fraud despite clear evidence to the contrary.”
During the trial of the claim last year, the judge heard that Mr Woodward-Fisher, who formerly competed for Great Britain as a rower, bought the site in 2011 and lived there with interior designer wife Kerry, 64.
The house was extended and radically remodelled by Mr Woodward-Fisher to about 11,000 sq ft, before it was sold on to Dr Hunyak, 50, and Ms Patarkatsishvili, 41, in 2019.
Dr Hunyak is a paediatric dentist who practices in Chelsea, while his wife is daughter of Badri Patarkatsishvili, a Georgian businessman who fell out with Vladimir Putin and set up home in the UK in 2000 before dying of heart failure in 2008.
Prior to purchase, they or their staff visited the mansion – which has seven bathrooms, a swimming pool, spa, cinema and gym in a newly formed double basement – on at least 11 separate occasions, the court was told.
But despite their careful inspection, the couple said they were dismayed when they were hit with what one insect specialist called “an infestation of extreme proportions…amounting to millions of moths” in their deluxe house.
Their barrister, Mr McGhee, claimed Dr Hunyak ended up having to swat around 100 moths a day to stay on top of the problem, and even now after intensive sprays and expert treatment, still maintains a daily kill count of up to 35.
The couple said the source of the moth scourge was the destructive insects nesting in the wool insulation behind walls and ceilings in the house.
Mr McGhee said Mr Woodward-Fisher had known about moths in the house before he decided to sell up, but in pre-contract enquiries with solicitors said he was unaware of any “vermin infestation” or “defects” in the house that weren’t visible.
In their claim, Dr Hunyak and his wife asked the judge to reverse the house sale on the basis of alleged “fraudulent misrepresentation” so that they get their £32.5m purchase money back, plus compensation for other losses.
Mr Woodward-Fisher denied all claims, insisting that he gave honest and full replies on the pre-sale enquiries form, and that as far as he knew any previous moth problems had been eliminated by the time of the move.
His KC, Jonathan Seitler, insisted Mr Woodward-Fisher had been honest when dealing with the enquiry about possible previous “vermin infestation,” having told his solicitor they had experienced problems with moths, only to be assured that “moths were not vermin and therefore not relevant to this enquiry”.
Giving judgment earlier this month, Mr Justice Fancourt said Dr Hunyak had at times “exaggerated” the extent of ongoing problems, but found that Mr Woodward-Fisher had given “false” answers in the pre-contract questions.
“I do not find that he was consciously trying to deceive the claimants,” he said.
“He simply wanted to sell the house and move on. As he admitted in cross-examination, disclosure of the infestation would likely have caused the sale to go off, and he would have been left needing to move out of the house and do expensive works to remove all the woollen insulation.
“In my judgment, Mr Woodward-Fisher was hoping that the problem might have gone away and he was willing to take the risk that he was wrong about that.
“He stated that he was unaware of any defect in the property that was not apparent on inspection…that was false, because the infested condition of the insulation in the floor voids and internal walls of the house was such a defect.”
During today’s additional hearing, lawyers for Mr Woodward-Fisher claimed they should not have to pay most of the couple’s lawyers’ bills for the trial due to the couple’s late addition of extra issues during the trial.
But Mr Justice Fancourt said they had been the successful party in the case, having sought rescission of the sale throughout, and that Mr Woodward-Fisher should pay up.
The court heard the couple are claiming up to £2.9m in costs, but the judge ordered the much lower £750,000 sum after hearing that their budget pre-trial had been declared at only £900,000.
The couple will now have to vacate the house in the next few months to allow Mr Woodward-Fisher to sell it in order to pay them what he now owes.
