AN "unwanted" son cut out of his estranged dad’s £2.4m will in favour of an adored granddaughter has won his fight against her for a slice of his father's fortune.

Colin Johnston, 77, sued his niece Lady Natalie Wackett, 39, after his father, Lord Sidney Johnston, left her his entire fortune after he died in March 2017 aged 95.

A court heard eldest child Colin had been blamed for ruining his mother's dream of becoming a Hollywood star and his parents had been 'cold' towards him ever since.

Sidney, who had bought titles for himself and other family members, including Lady Natalie, left Colin without a penny.

Mr Johnston, who now lives in rented housing and works part-time as a driver to make ends meet, claimed he had worked diligently and loyally for his dad for over 30 years until a major “rift” in 1991.

And he alleged that Sidney, who never bought him a title, had previously led him to believe that he would inherit something on his death.

But he also claimed his father and aspiring film star mum, Elsie, repeatedly favoured his younger brother, Lord Gary Johnston — the father of Natalie — who died in October 2016.

Mr Johnston felt Gary was the apple of his parents’ eyes, and that their hostility towards him stemmed from his being “an unwanted war baby” — born in 1942 while his dad was serving in the RAF.

HOLLYWOOD DREAMS DASHED

He told the court his mum, Elsie, was always “cool” towards him and once told him “that if it had not been for him she could have been a Hollywood film star”.

Mr Johnston’s barrister, David Giles, said this bitter background “fed a determination that Colin would not inherit and favouritism expressed towards Gary, and later his daughter Natalie”.

And although the pensioner gave evidence in court that he always loved his father, he accepted that Sidney had ultimately come to dislike him.

Awarding him £125,000 from his dad’s estate, Judge Edwin Johnson QC agreed there was “something fundamentally wrong from an early stage in the relationship between Colin and his parents”.

Sidney had in the past assured Colin that both he and his brother would eventually inherit his business assets, but the judge said this was misleading.

“I have already found that Sidney had made a decision that Colin should inherit nothing from him by 1976 — if not from an earlier date,” said the judge.

"I very much regret that it seems to me, and I so find, that what Sidney actually intended for his property and what he gave Colin to understand in that respect, were two very different things.

"I regret to have to make the finding, but I do make the finding that, in this respect, Colin was misled by his father."

Source: Read Full Article