Yacht law: Fraud allegations against interior designer - WhatsApp founder allegedly deceived for years
Boote Exclusiv
· 11.03.2026
Jan Koum, the billionaire founder of the messenger service WhatsApp, is alleged - according to several media reports - to have been deceived by his interior designer over many years. This case illustrates how owners can protect themselves from deception. In fact, on 29 September 2025, Jan Koum's lawyers initiated proceedings against the Parisian designer Rémi Tessier, who is highly regarded in the superyacht world, in the Southern District of New York. The legal basis is 28 U.S.C. § 1782, which allows applicants to obtain documents, correspondence and other evidence by way of discovery proceedings. According to media reports, it is planned to initiate criminal proceedings before the criminal court responsible for Rémi Tessier, the Tribunal correctionnel in Paris.
What exactly is the offence?
It is undisputed that the interior designer had been working for Jan Koum for years. In particular, he was responsible for the interior design of several properties as well as the design of the two 100-metre yachts "Moonrise 1" and "Moonrise 2". He enjoyed the trust of his client and had a more or less free hand as far as purchasing was concerned.
The allegations now levelled against Tessier are serious. The designer is alleged to have sold furniture as "custom-made" and design objects as "original", although neither was true. He is alleged to have made false statements about the origin and materials of furnishings, including carpets, steak knives and sofas. For example, the carpets did not come from a French luxury manufacturer as stated, but from an unnamed mass producer; they were also not hand-knotted silk and pashmina carpets, but comparatively cheap carpets made of synthetic material. He allegedly did not pass on discounts granted by suppliers and changed the invoices accordingly.
Finally, it is alleged that the designer received commissions totalling several hundred thousand US dollars from art dealers without disclosing this to his client.
How are these accusations to be legally assessed?
First of all, the presumption of innocence - derived in German law from the rule of law and in European law from Article 6 (2) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) - must be emphasised. According to this, every person accused of a criminal offence is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a constitutional procedure. In this case, as in any other criminal proceedings, the competent public prosecutor's office must therefore examine the accusations levelled against the accused. If it decides to bring charges following the examination carried out as part of the preliminary investigation, it must prove that the objective and subjective elements of the offence in question are fulfilled and that the accused acted unlawfully and culpably. The public prosecutor's office must dispel all doubts. If it fails to do so, the accused must be acquitted - in dubio pro reo!
With regard to the accusation that the designer made false statements about the origin and material, criminal liability for fraud may be considered. The objective offence is committed by anyone who damages the assets of another person by creating or maintaining an error through the misrepresentation of false facts or the distortion or suppression of true facts. The victim must dispose of assets as a result of the error and the disposal must result in financial loss. The subjective offence of fraud requires that the perpetrator acts intentionally, i.e. with knowledge and intent of all objective characteristics. In addition, he must intend to obtain a pecuniary advantage for himself or a third party.
Assuming that the allegations outlined above are correct, the designer would have misrepresented the facts in this case. This is because he claimed that the carpets in question were hand-knotted silk and pashmina carpets from a French luxury manufacturer. In fact, this was not the case - they were made of synthetic fibres.
If Jan Koum assumed at the time of payment that he was paying for the high-quality carpets described, then he would have disposed of assets as a result of the error. The pecuniary loss would then be seen in the fact that the purchased carpets were worth considerably less than those promised. Therefore, the objective offence of fraud would be fulfilled. Subjectively, the perpetrator would have to have recognised and wanted this and also have acted with the intention of gaining a financial advantage. Assuming that the above facts are correct, this can be assumed.
Another allegation of fraud is in the air
In addition to the accusation of fraud, the issuing of false invoices is a criminal offence of forgery of documents. This offence objectively comprises three types of action. In simple terms, anyone who produces a false document, falsifies a genuine document or uses a false or falsified document is liable to prosecution. A document is an embodied declaration of thought that is generally understandable or understandable to insiders, recognises an issuer and is suitable and intended to prove a legally significant fact. It is unauthentic if it does not originate from the person named as the issuer. Forgery is the subsequent alteration of the intellectual content of a genuine document, which gives the impression that the issuer made the declaration from the outset as it stands after the alteration. In the case of forgery, the perpetrator must also act wilfully, i.e. with knowledge and intent of the objective characteristics, and also intend to deceive legal relations.
Read also:
An invoice is considered a document because it contains a written declaration, is suitable as evidence in legal transactions and recognises its issuer. If the allegations against the designer are true, the issuing of inflated invoices does not lead to the fulfilment of the offence of forgery of a document if the issuer has stated an inflated price at the request of the designer. This is because in this case there would be no deception about the authorship of the document, but "merely" a false declaration in terms of content. So if an invoice is issued by the actual issuer, it remains genuine even if the amount stated is incorrect. However, the legal assessment is different if the designer has personally increased the invoice amount after the invoice has been issued. In this case, a genuine document would have been falsified.
With regard to the concealed receipt of commissions, so-called kickbacks, the designer could also be charged with breach of trust. Infidelity occurs when someone abuses an authorisation granted to them to dispose of another person's assets or to bind another person, or breaches a duty incumbent upon them to protect another person's financial interests. This offence is also made up of objective and subjective elements. The objective elements of the offence require that an existing duty to look after assets is breached through the misuse of powers or breach of trust and that the person being looked after suffers a financial disadvantage as a result. The subjective offence also requires intent, i.e. knowledge and intent with regard to the breach of duty and the resulting damage.
The concealed receipt of commissions may be a criminal offence if the recipient has a special duty to protect the assets of another person. This applies to persons who manage assets for others or make decisions that have a significant influence on the assets of others. A designer who fulfils a normal contract for work or services generally does not have this special duty. He owes careful work, but not asset management. For this reason, concealing commissions does not usually constitute embezzlement. In the luxury sector, the situation can be assessed differently, namely when a designer incurs considerable expenses for his client as part of his contract. In these cases, it is not unreasonable to assume a duty to look after assets. The breach of this duty must result in a financial disadvantage for the client. The receipt of commission is usually independent of the assets of the person who ultimately purchases the art or furniture. A financial loss is therefore typically not to be assumed. However, if the concealed commission paid results in the purchase price being different, i.e. higher, or if discounts that are usually granted are not granted due to the rebate, financial loss can be assumed.
What measures can I take to protect myself against fraud?
Naturally, it is not always possible to protect yourself against fraud in every situation. It is particularly difficult if the perpetrator and victim are in a relationship of trust and the trust placed in them is abused. This is because preventative measures are usually not even taken due to the relationship of trust. However, simple measures can prevent fraudulent behaviour or at least make it more difficult.
Persons who carry out tasks for an owner, in particular placing or accepting orders or settling invoices, should be required by way of restricting internal powers of attorney to dispose of the owner's assets only up to a certain limit. Above a certain amount, expenses should be authorised by a second trusted person or the owner themselves. Contracts and invoices should also be checked at regular intervals, at least on a random basis: Who was commissioned? Have comparative offers been obtained? Have contracts been negotiated in the best possible way and their execution monitored in the best possible way? It is generally advisable to establish close-meshed reporting obligations that enable the owner or his closest advisors to ask questions and monitor expenditure.
As the saying goes: trust is good, control is better!
Experts for all questions of yacht law
The yacht lawyers Dr Tim Schommer (tim.schommer@clydeco.com) and Dr Volker Lücke (volker.luecke@clydeco.com) have been advising yacht clients in Germany and abroad for over 18 years. They advise on the planning and construction phase, the purchase and sale, the owner structure, yacht operation including insurance, crewing and charter as well as the handling of damage and third-party claims.
