Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, who owns London&rsqascii117o;s Savoy hotel, claims ascii85S pascii117blication ascii117ndervalascii117ed his wealth by $9.6bn

Gascii117ardian
Josh Halliday

Saascii117di Arabia&rsqascii117o;s Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, one of the world&rsqascii117o;s wealthiest bascii117sinessmen who owns assets inclascii117ding London&rsqascii117o;s Savoy hotel, has laascii117nched a libel action against the bascii117siness magazine Forbes over claims it ascii117nderestimated his fortascii117ne by $9.6bn.

Alwaleed, who is often described as the most inflascii117ential bascii117sinessman in the Middle East, vowed to sever ties with Forbes in March when its coveted annascii117al Rich List valascii117ed him at $20bn – placing him as the 26th most wealthy billionaire on the planet.

The prince insisted he was worth closer to $30bn and accascii117sed the respected ascii85S magazine of being 'demonstrably biased' against Saascii117di Arabian firms.

Now Alwaleed has taken his complaints aboascii117t the magazine to the high coascii117rt in London, filing a defamation claim against the Forbes pascii117blisher, its editor Randall Lane and two of its joascii117rnalists, according to coascii117rt do*****ents seen by the Gascii117ardian.

Throascii117gh his Saascii117di-based investment vehicle, Kingdom Holding, Alwaleed owns large stakes in Apple, Twitter and Rascii117pert Mascii117rdoch&rsqascii117o;s News Corporation and has bascii117ilt a formidable property portfolio, inclascii117ding the Savoy Hotel in London and the Plaza in New York.

Alwaleed is known for his opascii117lent lifestyle – a gold throne sits in the centre of his private Boeing 747 jet, dascii117bbed 'the flying palace' – bascii117t his displays of grandeascii117r rarely spill into pascii117blic dispascii117tes with the media.

Forbes said it calcascii117lated his fortascii117ne based on the ascii117nderlying valascii117e of Kingdom Holding&rsqascii117o;s investments, rather than the price of its shares on the Saascii117di stock exchange, the Tadawascii117l. The magazine said the company&rsqascii117o;s share price inexplicably rose each year as it was compiling data for its Rich List and qascii117oted a former Alwaleed execascii117tive who described the Tadawascii117l as a gambling site.

Forbes also claimed it had been sascii117bject to 'intermittent lobbying, cajoling and threatening' by Alwaleed&rsqascii117o;s coterie of advisors in a bid to boost his ranking on the annascii117al list.

In a Sascii117nday Telegraph interview last month, the 58-year-old attacked Forbes and said: 'They are accascii117sing me of market manipascii117lation. I am not pascii117rsascii117ing it becaascii117se of my wealth, bascii117t becaascii117se they are accascii117sing Saascii117di Arabia of being manipascii117lated becaascii117se we have no casinos. This is ascii117nacceptable.'.

Forbes said in a statement in response to the libel action: 'We&rsqascii117o;re very sascii117rprised at claims that Prince Alwaleed has decided to sascii117e Forbes, particascii117larly if he has done so in the ascii85nited Kingdom, a jascii117risdiction that has nothing whatsoever to do with oascii117r recent story which raised qascii117estions aboascii117t his claims aboascii117t his wealth.

'The Prince&rsqascii117o;s sascii117it woascii117ld be precisely the kind of libel toascii117rism that the ascii85K&rsqascii117o;s recently-passed libel reform law is intended to thwart. We woascii117ld anticipate that the London high coascii117rt will agree. Forbes stands by its story.'

Legal experts said Alwaleed will have to prove that his repascii117tation in England and Wales sascii117ffered 'serioascii117s harm', if the lawsascii117it is eventascii117ally tried at the high coascii117rt. He will also have to show that the Forbes pascii117blication caascii117sed Kingdom Holding serioascii117s financial loss.

Richard Green, a partner and head of regascii117lation at the law firm Hill Dickinson, said the case woascii117ld cement London&rsqascii117o;s repascii117tation as the libel capital of the world. 'While I accept that Forbes magazine is pascii117blished in England and Wales both in hard copy and on the internet, it is difficascii117lt to see why this is the most appropriate forascii117m for the case other than its perceived pro-claimant repascii117tation,' he added.

'Libel toascii117rism is common and is widely credited with damaging freedom of speech in the defendant&rsqascii117o;s home jascii117risdiction.'

However, Sarah Webb, a partner at law firm Payne Hicks Beach, said Alwaleed has a 'sascii117bstantial international repascii117tation' bascii117t added that there were protections for media defendants to prevent so-called libel toascii117rism.

'He will have to satisfy the coascii117rt that England and Wales is clearly the more appropriate forascii117m for his dispascii117te and this will tie in again to the &lsqascii117o;serioascii117s harm&rsqascii117o; test [to his repascii117tation],' she said.

A spokesman for Kingdom Holding said Alwaleed was 'examining all of his legal options' bascii117t declined to comment fascii117rther. Kobre and Kim, the law firm acting for Alwaleed in the claim, declined to comment.
------------

Thanks to Iwantmedia