Why a Yacht Broker Is Suing Revolut's Founder Over a €350M Boat

Revolut chief executive Nik Storonsky has been sued in London's High Court by luxury yacht broker Chris Cecil-Wright, who claims the fintech founder cut him out of a €350 million superyacht purchase to avoid paying a €17.5 million commission. The lawsuit, reported by the Financial Times, concerns a 102-metre vessel built by German shipyard Lürssen.

According to court documents cited by the FT, Storonsky contacted Cecil-Wright in October 2024 about managing the construction of a new yacht, and in 2025 asked whether an interim boat was available while the new one was being built. Cecil-Wright suggested the Lürssen superyacht, which at the time belonged to Canadian businessman and former hockey player Patrick Dovigi. In January 2026, however, Storonsky's adviser told the broker that the founder had bought the yacht directly from Dovigi.

The vessel's ownership history was complex. Ordered by Dovigi, it was later sold to an anonymous Brazilian owner arrested in November 2025; the article identifies the arrested executive as Daniel Vorcaro, linked to the Banco Master fraud investigation. After that arrest, Dovigi repurchased the yacht and resold it to Storonsky. Cecil-Wright argues his firm was the effective cause of the sale and is owed a 5% commission under its brokerage contract.

A spokesman for Storonsky's family office said the claim lacked merit and would be defended. Cecil-Wright told the FT it was the first time he had faced such a situation and that he was very concerned, adding that he was taking action. The case is ongoing.

Advertisement

The 'Effective Cause' Question Behind the Commission Claim

The Claim Rests on 'Effective Cause'

Cecil-Wright is not alleging that Storonsky broke a written commission agreement in the ordinary sense. The lawsuit hinges on the legal doctrine of effective cause: whether the broker's introduction and work were the decisive factor that led to the January sale, even though the final contract was signed directly between Storonsky and Dovigi. Courts in similar brokerage disputes typically examine the chain of introductions, negotiations and the point at which buyer and seller were brought together. The fact that Storonsky first approached Cecil-Wright in October 2024 and later asked about an interim vessel is likely to be central.

A Convoluted Ownership Chain Raises Questions

The superyacht's path to Storonsky was anything but straightforward. Ordered by Dovigi, it was sold to an anonymous Brazilian owner, with the article pointing to Banco Master-linked executive Daniel Vorcaro, who was arrested in November 2025. Dovigi then repurchased the vessel and resold it to Storonsky in January 2026. Cecil-Wright's argument is that this sequence was designed to leave the broker out of the final transaction. Whether the court accepts that depends on emails, messages and the exact timing of the broker's involvement, none of which have been made public.

Reputation and an Industry That Runs on Introductions

For Cecil-Wright, the case is also about a business model. Superyacht brokers typically earn commissions of around 5% and rely on relationships and discretion; a high-profile example of a client buying directly could encourage others to attempt the same. Storonsky, for his part, faces unwelcome headlines even if the claim fails, a reminder that the personal affairs of high-profile fintech founders can collide with their public role. The broker's previous work on yachts for sanctioned Russian billionaires adds context but no suggestion of wrongdoing in this transaction.