A momentous court battle over the fate of Rupert Murdoch’s media empire gets under way in Nevada today.
At stake is the future of a string of newspapers and television channels consumed by millions of people around the world, as well as thousands of jobs – and billions of pounds.
The media mogul, who turned 93 this year, has spent decades building up his news brands, making them some of the most powerful and influential in the Western world.
But now, as he nears the end of his life, a rift has opened up in his family – and raised questions about what kind of legacy he will leave behind.
The case will decide who controls Murdoch’s family trust after he is gone and which of his children will have major voting rights in his companies. And it could result in the billionaire’s heir apparent Lachlan Murdoch being out-manoeuvred by some of his less conservative siblings.
Image: Rupert Murdoch and his wife Elena Zhukova. Pic: News Corp
What are his family members fighting over?
The row centres around future power and influence over Mr Murdoch‘s two companies – News Corp and Fox.
News Corp owns newspapers including The Wall Street Journal and the New York Post in the US, The Australian, The Herald Sun and The Daily Telegraph in Australia, and The Sun, The Times and The Sunday Times in the UK.
Also under News Corp’s wing is publishing giant HarperCollins, along with several Australian TV channels.
Advertisement
Meanwhile, Fox News, Fox Sports and streaming service Tubi form part of his other major company.
Mr Murdoch has a roughly 40% stake in voting shares of each company.
Sky News, which Mr Murdoch launched in the UK in 1989, is no longer part of his empire.
At the end of 2018, Fox’s film entertainment assets, such as The Simpsons and the Avatar film franchise, were sold to Disney – while the company’s 39% stake in Sky was sold to Comcast.
Image: Lachlan Murdoch and his wife Sarah in February 2020. Pic: Reuters
Who is involved in the case and why?
Sorting out Mr Murdoch’s inheritance was never going to be easy – he has six children and has been married five times, most recently to retired molecular biologist Elena Zhukova.
However, it had long been presumed that his business succession plans were largely settled in 1999, following his divorce from his second wife Anna.
That year the Murdoch Family Trust was founded – establishing the principle that, when he died, his News Corp and Fox’s voting shares would be divided between his four oldest children – Prudence, Elisabeth, Lachlan and James.
Following the “irrevocable” agreement, Mr Murdoch began integrating some of his children into roles at his companies.
However, following a shift in relations with some of his offspring, it emerged earlier this year that the media mogul had changed his mind.
The New York Times revealed that Mr Murdoch had decided he wanted to change the terms of the trust, to ensure his eldest son Lachlan would go on to run his businesses without “interference” from his other siblings.
The newspaper reported that James, Elisabeth and Prudence “were caught completely off-guard” by the move and had decided to unite to stop him.
Lachlan has reportedly taken his father’s side in the case.
Image: James Murdoch with his wife Kathryn Hufschmid at the Oscars earlier this year. Pic: Reuters
Why did Murdoch change his mind?
The billionaire’s efforts to tweak the terms of the family trust come amid signs that he has increasingly favoured Lachlan as his chosen heir in recent years.
When Mr Murdoch revealed last year he was stepping down as chairof Fox and News Corp, it was announced that his eldest son would become the sole chair of News Corp – while also continuing as executive chair and chief executive of Fox.
The main reason, it is thought, is politics. Lachlan is seen as more similar and aligned with his father’s right-wing views, while James, Elisabeth and Prudence are seen as more moderate in their beliefs.
Indeed, the media mogul’s decision to give Lachlan “permanent, exclusive control” came amid worries over the “lack of consensus” among his children about the future of the Murdoch brands, according to court documents seen by The New York Times.
Image: Elisabeth Murdoch, pictured in 2009. Pic: AP
James has been openly critical of Fox News – and recently endorsed Democrat Kamala Harris for president – while his sister Elisabeth has also “privately expressed discomfort about being associated with Fox News”, according to the Wall Street Journal.
The newspaper, which is owned by Mr Murdoch, also reported that “putting more power in Lachlan’s hands is meant to ensure stability at the businesses and avoid a confusing ownership structure in coming years”.
It quoted sources who said Mr Murdoch had been “dismayed that James and his wife seemed to be embarrassed by Fox yet were happy to enjoy the fruits of its financial success”, with the two not said to be on speaking terms.
Image: Mr Murdoch turned 93 earlier this year. Pic: PA
So what’s going to happen?
Despite the family rift, there is one thing the Murdochs involved agree on – they do not want their media rivals to feast on their fallout.
Consequently, the hearing to settle the dispute is being held in private – despite attempts from news agencies to grant public access – behind closed doors at the Washoe County Courthouse in Reno, Nevada, with probate commissioner Edmund J Gorman Jr due to rule on the case.
An earlier hearing concluded that Mr Murdoch could change the terms of the trust – if he could demonstrate he was acting in good faith, for the sole benefit of his heirs.
If the billionaire wins, News Corp and Fox are expected to continue along the same path after his death under Lachlan’s leadership, with, for example, Fox News continuing to loudly back the Republican Party in the US.
However, if the three siblings win, a battle over the future of the firms is likely to ensue. In theory, they could challenge the political leaning of Murdoch’s newspapers and channels, or even sell them off – as they could out-vote Lachlan on key decisions.
A third possibility is a compromise or some other kind of settlement being reached. Talks have reportedly been held in recent weeks over James and his sisters selling their stakes in the trust. However, these are said to have failed – possibly due to the potentially high sums involved.
Image: Rupert Murdoch with his sons Lachlan (left) and James (right) at his wedding to Jerry Hall in 2016. Pic: Reuters
The Murdochs involved have made no public statement on the case, with their spokespeople either declining to comment or not responding to requests.
It also comes amid uncertain times for the future of the news industry.
In an interview earlier this summer with Sky News Australia – which is separate from Sky News in the UK – Mr Murdoch predicted that printed newspapers will die out within 15 years due to changes in the ways people consume news.
If he is right, some of the tough questions facing his successors could be far bigger than just which party to back.
Naguib Kheraj, the City veteran, has been shortlisted to become the next chairman of HSBC Holdings, Europe’s biggest bank.
Sky News can reveal that Mr Kheraj, a former Barclays finance chief, is among a small number of contenders currently being considered to replace Sir Mark Tucker.
HSBC, which has a market capitalisation of £165.4bn, has been conducting a search for Sir Mark’s successor since the start of the year.
In June, Sky News revealed that the former McKinsey boss Kevin Sneader was among the candidates being considered to lead the bank, although it was unclear this weekend whether he remained in the process.
Mr Kheraj would, in many respects, be seen as a solid choice for the job.
He is familiar with HSBC’s core markets in Asia, having spent several years on the board of Standard Chartered, the FTSE-100 bank, latterly as deputy chairman.
He also possesses extensive experience as a chairman, having led the privately held pensions insurer Rothesay Life, while he now chairs Petershill Partners, the London-listed private equity investment group backed by Goldman Sachs.
Mr Kheraj’s other interests have included acting as an adviser to the Aga Khan Development Board and The Wellcome Trust, as well as the Financial Services Authority.
He spent 12 years at Barclays, holding board roles for much of that time, before he went on to become chief executive of JP Morgan Cazenove, the London-based investment bank.
HSBC’s shares have soared over the last year, rising by close to 50%, despite the headwinds posed by President Donald Trump’s sweeping global tariffs regime.
In June, the bank said that Sir Mark would be replaced on an interim basis by Brendan Nelson, one of its existing board members, while it continued the search for a permanent successor.
Ann Godbehere, HSBC’s senior independent director, said at the time: “The nomination and corporate governance committee continues to make progress on the succession process for the next HSBC group chair.
“Our focus is on securing the best candidate to lead the board and wider group over the next phase of our growth and development.”
Sky News revealed late last year that MWM, the headhunter founded by Anna Mann, a prominent figure in the executive search sector, was advising HSBC on the process.
Since then, at least one other firm has been drafted in to work on the mandate.
Sir Mark, who has chaired HSBC since 2017, steps down at the end of next month to become non-executive chair of AIA, the Asian insurer he used to run.
He will continue to advise HSBC’s board during the hunt for his long-term successor.
As a financial behemoth with deep ties to both China and the US, HSBC is deeply exposed to escalating trade and diplomatic tensions between the two countries.
When he was appointed, Mr Tucker became the first outsider to take the post in the bank’s 152-year history – which has a big presence on the high street thanks to its acquisition of the Midland Bank in 1992.
He oversaw a rapid change of leadership, appointing bank veteran John Flint to replace Stuart Gulliver as chief executive.
The transition did not work out, however, with Mr Tucker deciding to sack Mr Flint after just 18 months.
He was replaced on an interim basis by Noel Quinn in the summer of 2018, with that change becoming permanent in April 2020.
Mr Quinn spent a further four years in the post before deciding to step down, and in July 2024 he was succeeded by Georges Elhedery, a long-serving executive in HSBC’s markets unit, and more recently the bank’s chief financial officer.
The new chief’s first big move in the top job was to unveil a sweeping reorganisation of HSBC that sees it reshaped into eastern markets and western markets businesses.
He also decided to merge its commercial and investment banking operations into a single division.
The restructuring, which Mr Elhedery said would “result in a simpler, more dynamic, and agile organisation” has drawn a mixed reaction from analysts, although it has not interrupted a strong run for the stock.
During Sir Mark’s tenure, HSBC has also continued to exit non-core markets, selling operations in countries such as Canada and France as it has sharpened its focus on its Asian businesses.
On Friday, HSBC’s London-listed shares closed at 946.7p.
Shares in UK banks have fallen sharply on the back of a report which urges the chancellor to place their profits in her sights at the coming budget.
As Rachel Reeves stares down a growing deficit – estimated at between £20bn-£40bn heading into the autumn – the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) said there was an opportunity for a windfall by closing a loophole.
It recommended a new levy on the interest UK lenders receive from the Bank of England, amounting to £22bn a year, on reserves held as a result of the Bank’s historic quantitative easing, or bond-buying, programme.
It was first introduced at the height of the financial crisis, in 2009.
The left-leaning think-tank said the money received by banks amounted to a subsidy and suggested £8bn could be taken from them annually to pay for public services.
It argued that the loss-making scheme – a consequence of rising interest rates since 2021 – had left taxpayers footing the bill unfairly as the Treasury has to cover any loss.
More on Rachel Reeves
Related Topics:
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:28
Why taxes might go up
The Bank recently estimated the total hit would amount to £115bn over the course of its lifetime.
The publication of the report coincided with a story in the Financial Times which spoke of growing fears within the banking sector that it was firmly in the chancellor’s sights.
Her first budget, in late October last year, put businesses on the hook for the bulk of its tax-raising measures.
Ms Reeves is under pressure to find more money from somewhere as she has ruled out breaking her own fiscal rules to help secure the cash she needs through heightened borrowing.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:17
Is Labour plotting a ‘wealth tax’?
Other measures understood to be under consideration include a wealth tax, new property tax and a shake-up that could lead to a replacement for council tax.
Analysts at Exane told clients in a note: “In the last couple of years, the chancellor has been protective of the banks and has avoided raising taxes.
“However, public finances may require additional cash and pressures for a bank tax from within the Labour party seem to be rising,” it concluded.
The investor flight saw shares in Lloyds and NatWest plunge by more than 5%. Those for Barclays were more than 4% lower at one stage.
A spokesperson for the Treasury said the best way to strengthen public finances was to speed up economic growth.
“Changes to tax and spend policy are not the only ways of doing this, as seen with our planning reforms,” they added.
The man dubbed “Britain’s most hated boss” for his controversial policy of sacking hundreds of seafarers and replacing them with cheaper agency staff is to quit.
Sky News can exclusively reveal that Peter Hebblethwaite, the chief executive of P&O Ferries, is leaving the company.
Sources said he had decided to resign for personal reasons.
Mr Hebblethwaite joined the ranks of Britain’s most notorious corporate figures in 2022 when P&O Ferries – a subsidiary of the giant Dubai-based ports operator DP World – said it was sacking 800 staff with immediate effect – some of whom learned their fate via a video message.
The policy, which Mr Hebblethwaite defended to MPs during subsequent select committee hearings, erupted into a national scandal, prompting changes in the law to give workers greater protection.
Under the new legislation, the government plans to tighten collective redundancy requirements for operators of foreign vessels.
More from Money
In a statement issued in response to a request from Sky News, a P&O Ferries spokesperson said: “Peter Hebblethwaite has communicated his intention to resign from his position as chief executive officer to dedicate more time to family matters.
Image: Peter Hebblethwaite gives evidence to a committee of MPs in 2022. Pic: PA
“P&O Ferries extends its gratitude to Peter Hebblethwaite for his contributions as CEO over the past four years.
“During his tenure the company navigated the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic, initiated a path towards financial stability, and introduced the world’s first large double-ended hybrid ferries on the Dover-Calais route, thereby enhancing sustainability.
“We extend our best wishes to him for his future endeavours.”
A source close to the company said it anticipated making an announcement on Mr Hebblethwaite’s successor in the near term.
A former executive at J Sainsbury, Greene King and Alliance Unichem, Mr Hebblethwaite joined P&O Ferries in 2019, before taking over as chief executive in November 2021.
Insiders claimed on Friday that he had “transformed” the business following the bitter blows dealt to its finances by the COVID-19 pandemic and – to some degree – by the impact of Britain’s exit from the European Union.
Image: A union protest is shown at the height of the mass sackings row in 2022
P&O Ferries carries 4.5 million passengers annually on routes between the UK and continental European ports including Calais and Rotterdam.
It also operates a route between Northern Ireland and Scotland, and is a major freight carrier.
The company’s losses soared during the pandemic, with DP World – its sole shareholder – supporting it through hundreds of millions of pounds in loans.
Its most recent accounts, which were significantly delayed, showed a significant reduction in losses in 2023 to just over £90m.
The reduction from the previous year’s figure of almost £250m was partly attributed to cost reduction exercises.
The accounts also showed that Mr Hebblethwaite received a pay package of £683,000, including a bonus of £183,000.
“I reflected on accepting that payment, but ultimately I did decide to accept it,” he told MPs.
“I do recognise it is not a decision that everybody would have made.”
The row over his pay was especially acute because of his admission that P&O Ferries’ lowest-paid seafarers received hourly pay of just £4.87.
Mr Hebblethwaite had argued since the mass sackings of 2022 that the company would have gone bust without the drastic cost-cutting that it entailed.
The company insisted at the time that those affected by the redundancies had been offered “enhanced” packages to leave.
Last October, the then transport secretary, Louise Haigh, said: “The mass sacking by P&O Ferries was a national scandal which can never be allowed to happen again,” adding that measures to protect seafarers from “rogue employers” would prevent a repetition.
“This issue has been ignored for over 2 years, but this new government is moving fast and bringing forward measures within 100 days,” Ms Haigh added.
“We are closing the legal loophole that P&O Ferries exploited when they sacked almost 800 dedicated seafarers and replaced them with low-paid agency workers and we are requiring operators to pay the equivalent of National Minimum Wage in UK waters.
“Make no mistake – this is good for workers and good for business.”
The minister’s description of P&O Ferries as “rogue”, and suggestion that consumers should boycott the company, sparked a row which threatened to overshadow the government’s International Investment Summit last October.
Sky News’s business and economics correspondent, Paul Kelso, revealed that DP World had withdrawn from participating in the event, and paused a £1bn investment announcement.
The company relented after Sir Keir Starmer publicly distanced the government from Ms Haigh’s characterisation of DP World.