Unsupported browser

For a better experience please update your browser to its latest version.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We use cookies to personalise your experience; learn more in our Privacy and Cookie Policy. You can opt out of some cookies by adjusting your browser settings; see the cookie policy for details. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies.

Patrik Schumacher in High Court bid to remove other executors of Zaha Hadid’s will

Patrik schumacher at waf

Patrik Schumacher has begun legal proceedings to remove three executors from their role in overseeing Zaha Hadid’s estate

Schumacher, who is principal of Zaha Hadid Architects and the fourth executor of the late architect’s will, has today (14 November) gone to the High Court to try and remove the other three: property developer Peter Palumbo, artist Brian Clarke and Zaha’s niece Rana Hadid.

It is understood Schumacher has become increasingly frustrated with how the executors, who are also trustees of the Zaha Hadid Foundation, have taken an interest in the running of the practice.

The estate of the late Zaha Hadid - and hence the executors - has ’ultimate control’ of Zaha Hadid Holdings and all the other related companies in the group. 

In a joint statement released by Rana Hadid, Clarke and Palumbo, the three said they had been ‘appointed personally by Zaha Hadid because she trusted them to act in her best interests’ and had known them for decades.

A lawyer acting for the three said: ‘The attempt to remove these three executors is totally unjustified and misconceived. Unlike Mr Schumacher (who is seeking to gain financially from the estate), the three executors have no personal financial interest.

‘They have at all times acted properly and in good faith with the desire to do their best for the estate given their friendship with Zaha Hadid.’

Rana Hadid added: ‘My aunt, Zaha, would have been devastated to learn what Schumacher is doing and we feel obliged to resist his claims in order to defend her great name and legacy.’

In 2016, the three hit out at Schumacher following his talk at the World Architecture Festival in Berlin, where he said that social housing should be scrapped, Hyde Park built on and all public space privatised.

They said at the time: ‘Knowing Dame Zaha as well as we did, we can state categorically that she would have been totally opposed to these views and would have disassociated herself from them. We personally also totally disagree with these views.’

In response a spokesperson for Zaha Hadid Architects said: ’This is a matter relating solely to the executors of Zaha Hadid’s estate.’

Schumacher released a statement of his own saying: ’[Regrettably] I have been left with no real choice in order to move matters along constructively in accordance with the wishes of the late Zaha Hadid.’

“It will be for the court to decide the merit of the application.’



Readers' comments (4)

  • Schumacher surely can't be some sort of self-important, arrogant, overbearing control freak, can he?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Phil Parker

    Schumacher thinks he should be considered an equal of ZH.

    Nobody else holds this opinion.

    And judging from the appointments of the trustees, neither did ZH

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Judging by the most recent creations of ZHA, neither should anyone else.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • who needs game of thrones? it sounds like everyone at ZHA needs to get some sleep

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions.

Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.