A 17th-century diamond worth up to £21 million is at the centre of a bitter High Court legal battle between two branches of a Qatari royal family.
The multi-billionaire Al-Thani family are fighting over the 70-carat Mughal-era gemstone, which is known as the Idol’s Eye.
Previously owned by an Ottoman sultan, the blue-tinged stone was more recently found in the London home of Sheikh Saoud bin Mohammed Ali Al-Thani, the late Qatari culture minister.
He had bought the prized stone in early 2004, before leaving it in the name of Elanus Holdings, a foundation that his widow and children are the beneficiaries of, following his death in 2014.
However, Sheikh Hamad bin Abdullah Al Thani, a London-based art collector – and cousin to the family – is now claiming he has the right to buy the stone for £7.8 million at the High Court.
Sheikh Hamad bin Abdullah – whose £316 million Mayfair home, Dudley House, is reportedly Britain’s most expensive private residence – says he can do so through his investment company, Qipco, after the stone was put on sale during the pandemic in 2020.
The loan agreement is said to have given him the option to buy the stone with the consent of Elanus, the company handling the estate of the widow and children of the late Sheikh Saoud.
However, the two sides disagree about any agreement ever having been reached, with the family claiming their offer to sell the gemstone was a “mistake”.
It was heard that the late sheikh’s son, Sheikh Hamad bin Saoud Al-Thani, had been interested in selling the stone to fund property deals, but had not consulted his mother or siblings, while company directors had not even considered a sale.
It was claimed the diamond could be worth far more than the listed sale price, with one expert putting its value at about £21 million.
Robert Stewart KC, the Qipco barrister, told the hearing it is “colourless with a slightly bluish tinge” and is thought to have been found in the Golconda mines in southern India in 1600.
The diamond was then owned by the high-end jeweller Harry Winston before it was bought by Sheikh Saoud for £7 million in 2004 and kept in his personal safe.
Sa’ad Hossain KC, the Elanus barrister, said: “It was one of the most significant pieces in his collection and one of the pieces he was most proud of.
“It is also of particular personal importance to his wife, Sheikha Amna.”
The gem was put into the name of Elanus for inheritance planning reasons and then loaned to family cousin Sheikh Hamad bin Abdullah’s company Qipco in 2014, to be included in his Mughal collection at lavish exhibitions.
Part of the loan agreement allowed for Qipco to buy the diamond if Elanus made clear a “wish” to sell.
The price would be based either on independent valuations gathered by the selling and buying parties, or $10 million (about £7.8 million), whichever was higher.
After Sheikh Saoud’s death, Qipco claimed the sale of the diamond was put into train in Feb 2020, with a letter from Elanus’s Swiss solicitor, who stated his son was willing to sell.
Qipco is now suing the Al-Thani family, who it claims were not entitled to stop the sale of the diamond. It is suing to enforce the sale at that price.
“Although the 6 February letter said that the family wished to sell the Idol’s Eye, they did not,” Mr Hossain told the court.
“Indeed, they had not even discussed or considered it.
“As for Elanus and its ultimate beneficial owner, the foundation, they had not even been consulted, let alone formed any ‘wish’.
“Even Sheikh Hamad bin Saoud, who set in motion getting advice on pre-emption and the drafting of the letter, had only sought to explore the possibility of a sale at the right price.
“When the rest of the family learnt of the letter, they were understandably shocked and corrected the position to Qipco – well before Qipco served any purchase notice.
“It is Qipco’s flat refusal to accept that withdrawal, and instead to insist on completing the purchase without Elanus’s consent, that has also led to this dispute.”
However, for Qipco, Mr Stewart said the letter constituted a “wish to sell”.
The hearing continues.
