Mountaineer's widow and daughter in bitter High Court battle over £10m fortune

The wife and daughter of a mountaineer killed in an avalanche are locked in a High Court fight over his £10m fortune.

Paul Samuel, 55, a mountaineer, author, explorer, businessman, and serial successful entrepreneur, died alongside two fellow climbers in June 2018 when they were hit by an avalanche whilst scaling Alpamayo, a peak in the Peruvian Andes.

In his will, he directed that his multimillion-pound estate be split roughly equally between his partner, Ana Lesiak Samuel, 59, and Kate Samuel, 25, his daughter from a previous relationship.

However, over eight years on from his death, the wealth remains undistributed amid accounts of a “difficult relationship” between the pair, which became increasingly “tense” due to “Ana refusing to allow Kate’s mother to attend with Kate at her father’s memorial”.

This week, London's High Court heard that ongoing disagreements between the explorer's partner, his daughter, and Anna Unett, a lawyer appointed to administer the distribution of Mr Samuel's estate, have caused years of delay.

Judge Master Francesca Kaye is now being asked to break the deadlock.

Mr Samuel was a multimillionaire businessman and dedicated explorer whose achievements included sailing across the South China Sea, trekking through the Borneo jungle and ascending Mount Everest, alongside several other famous peaks.

He died on 30 June 2018 in an ice fall on Alpamayo, during what was meant to be his final mountain expedition.

Fellow climber Eva Zontar, a Slovenian national, and Peruvian guide Jamie Quintana Figueroa also lost their lives.

Alpamayo is regarded as one of the most stunning summits in the Andes, making it a major attraction for mountaineers aiming to scale its 20,000ft peak.

Situated within Huascarán National Park, the peak forms part of the Cordillera Blanca range, which contains some of the highest mountains in Peru and the biggest tropical glacier system on Earth.

In November 2018, more than 300 people gathered at the Royal Geographical Society in Kensington, London, to commemorate Mr Samuel’s life.

The judge heard that most of the explorer's wealth, which included £780,000 Bank Farm, near Whitchurch, Shropshire, had been put into a trust by his will, with daughter Kate and partner Ana to have equal shares.

Some of his wealth has been distributed, with Kate having received a £1m payout and Ana handed the farm and another property, the court heard.

But the row reached the High Court for the first time in 2023 due to disagreements about the value of estate assets and how they ought to be divided, with Ana then failing in a bid to remove Ms Unett and Paul's father – who later died – as trustees.

But despite a judge having given directions on how the assets should be shared, a further three years have now passed and the estate has still not been distributed due to continuing delay and disagreements.

Mrs Unett, backed by Kate, is now asking to judge to remove Ana as executor of the estate and co-trustee of the will trust, blaming the delay on her and accusing her of costing the estate money.

But Ana is battling to hang onto her role, insisting that her husband wanted her to be in charge of his estate.

Kate's barrister Julie Case told the judge this week: “Kate believes that Ana is unsuitable to act as an executor. Kate supports Ms Unett’s application and asks the court to remove Ana as executor and trustee and appoint Ms Unett as executor in her place.

“The relationship between Ana and Kate has been strained for some time. Even when her father was alive, Ana and Kate did not enjoy a close relationship and the relationship became even more tense after the deceased’s death, with Ana refusing to allow Kate’s mother to attend with Kate at her father’s memorial service in London.”

The barrister accused Ana of “attempts to delay and frustrate the proper and efficient administration of the estate”, adding: “Ana appears to be racking up legal costs, purportedly on behalf of the estate, making unnecessary enquiries and in the knowledge that Kate does not agree to her incurring these costs.

“Ana has caused difficulties and delays since the April 2023 hearing. She appears to be unable – whether it is deliberate or not – to deal with anything in a straightforward and transparent manner.

“The will created two trusts, of which Ana and Kate were both beneficiaries. The deceased in his letter of wishes stated that he wanted both Ana and Kate to benefit equally from his estate.

“The trustees appointed the will trusts equally between Ana and Kate to achieve a clean break between them and specifically in the knowledge of and having regard to the difficult relationship between them.

“Despite the distributions being approved over three years ago, they have still not been completed. It is Kate’s position that, but for Ana’s conduct since the April 2023 order, all the distributions would now have been made and the administration of the estate would have been completed some time ago.”

She claimed Ana had put “her own interests above those of the estate and its other beneficiaries”.

“Ana is incurring significant costs at Kate’s expense and in the knowledge that Kate does not agree to her share of the estate incurring these costs,” she said.

“Kate wants to see the administration of the estate concluded as quickly as possible and with minimal cost to the estate.

“The deceased never intended Ana to act as the sole executor.”

Alexander Learmonth KC, for Ana, however told the judge that she denies being at fault for the delay and insists she is the right person to be in charge of the estate as that is what her dead husband wanted.

“Ana resists her removal as executor: there is simply no proper ground for doing so. Removal of any personal representative is a 'drastic step', not to be undertaken lightly, especially when she is Paul’s widow and an executor explicitly chosen by him and entrusted with the administration of his estate and the trust thereunder.

“As well as having been Paul’s wife and chosen executor, Ana is an experienced professional with an MBA and a career in business finance.

“Ana experienced a period of poor mental health in 2024 following her bereavement, but ... that has fully resolved.

“Ana has been using her time to further Paul’s wishes and legacy: publishing his book and raising funds for a school in Nepal to commemorate Paul.

“Ana accepts the distribution, approved by the court, as binding on her; that approval obviously includes the valuations attributed to the assets specifically appropriated to one or other beneficiaries part of their equal share; Ana wishes to finalise its implementation and has been taking steps to do so.”

The barrister went on to blame Ms Unett for the delay, saying that Ana had been refused access to vital estate documents, which stopped her making progress with the administration.

“Mrs Unett has now applied, purportedly in those same proceedings, to remove Ana from her position as executor, and to have herself appointed as sole administrator of Paul’s estate, leaving her as sole trustee,” he said.

“Mrs Unett says that the estate administration is almost complete. If so, then Ana, as the appointed and properly constituted executor, should simply be allowed to complete it.

“Instead, by wrongly insisting that Ana’s grant was issued by mistake, by refusing to hand over the estate administration files, by refusing to answer questions about the administration, and by maintaining a procedurally defective application, Mrs Unett’s actions have resulted in very substantial delay and wasted cost.

“The application as brought is defective and should be dismissed.”

For Mrs Unett, barrister Mark Baxter claimed that administration and distribution of the estate had in fact been “delayed and complicated by Ana's conduct”.

“It seems difficult for Ana to complete the estate administration properly and to the satisfaction of Mrs Unett as a trustee of the will trusts and Kate as a beneficiary of the distribution,” he told the judge.

“Generally, Ana's approach to all matters related to the estate is uncooperative, if not combative.

“Mrs Unett ... wishes for Ana to be removed as an executor and co-trustee. Kate wishes for Ana to be removed as an executor and trustee.

“The only person with any interest in the matter who wishes Ana to remain in office is Ana herself.”

After a half-day hearing, the case was adjourned, but is due to return to court at a later date.