Judge Rejects Russian Oligarch’s Claim Brad Pitt Diverted Winery Funds

Brad Pitt (right) watches Spain vs. Belgium in the 2026 FIFA World Cup on July 10 in Los Angeles, California. (Photo: Darren Campbell/Sportpix/SIPA USA)

Brad Pitt has defeated a new legal claim accusing him and his company of diverting funds from Château Miraval, with a Los Angeles judge ruling that the allegations do not establish California jurisdiction because the disputed conduct allegedly occurred in France, according to Law360.

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Cindy Panuco on Monday dismissed a cross-claim brought against Pitt by Tenute del Mondo BV, the company owned by Russian oligarch Yuri Shefler, who purchased Angelina Jolie’s 50% stake in the French winery in 2021.

Read More: ‘Back Off the Wagon’: Brad Pitt Says He’s Drinking Again After 7 Years Sober

The ruling concerns a specific claim under California Penal Code Section 496, which addresses receiving, concealing or withholding stolen property. Panuco granted a demurrer filed by Pitt and his company, Mondo Bongo LLC.

The judge allowed Tenute to amend and refile the claim but found that its allegations did not establish that any concealment or withholding occurred in California.

“Tenute therefore need not place the theft in California,” Panuco wrote. “It needs to place a concealment or a withholding here. It has not done so.”

Tenute had alleged that Pitt and Mondo Bongo diverted Château Miraval’s profits toward projects that benefited Pitt personally rather than the winery.

The company argued that the California court could exercise jurisdiction because Pitt and his company allegedly directed the conduct from California.

Panuco rejected that argument, saying the location where a decision was made does not establish where the alleged unlawful conduct occurred.

“On Tenute’s own allegations, both are in France,” the judge wrote, referring to where the disputed property was held and where the duty to deliver it arose.

The judge also said Mondo Bongo’s status as a California company did not establish that the alleged withholding occurred in the state.

“A California domicile is not an allegation that the withholding occurred here, any more than Pitt’s California residence is,” Panuco wrote.

The ruling is the latest development in a broader legal battle surrounding Château Miraval, the Provence estate Pitt and Jolie acquired in 2008. The former couple married at the property and made it a home with their children before Jolie filed for divorce in 2016.

Jolie later sold her interest in the winery to Tenute del Mondo, a wine company controlled by Shefler. Pitt sued Jolie and companies associated with her in 2022, alleging that she sold her stake without his consent and that the transaction threatened his control of the business.

The dispute has since expanded to include Shefler’s company and allegations involving the management and finances of Château Miraval.

In June, a California appeals court handed Pitt an important procedural victory when it ruled that he could pursue his claims against Shefler in California. The court found that the Russian businessman had sufficient ties to California for the case to proceed there.

That ruling followed another development involving Shefler’s company. A California judge ordered Stoli Group executive Alexey Oliynik to sit for a deposition in the Miraval litigation.

The latest ruling is different from those earlier decisions. Rather than determining whether Shefler can remain in the California case, Monday’s order addressed whether Tenute had sufficiently alleged that Pitt and Mondo Bongo violated California’s stolen-property law.

Panuco also rejected an allegation concerning a message Pitt allegedly sent from California directing that reports about the winery no longer be provided to Jolie because she was considering selling her stake.

“Even accepting that allegation, the message concerns the suppression of information,” Panuco wrote.

The judge said the disputed Château Miraval funds had already been spent in France, meaning there was no property in California to conceal.

Jolie is not directly involved in the jurisdictional dispute between Pitt and Tenute.

The broader litigation remains unresolved, with Pitt’s original claims against Jolie and related parties continuing separately from the claim dismissed Monday.

Pitt and Mondo Bongo are represented by John V. Berlinski and Julia B. Cherlow of Bird Marella Rhow Lincenberg Drooks & Nessim LLP. Tenute is represented by Matthew A. Lesnick of Lesnick Prince Pappas & Alverson LLP and Alejandro Brito of Brito PLLC.

The case is William B. Pitt et al. v. Angelina Jolie et al., case No. 22STCV06081, in the Superior Court of California for Los Angeles County.