Yoko Ono is back in the spotlight for all the right reasons: after years of legal wrangling, the Swiss courts have officially declared her the rightful owner of her late husband John Lennon’s stolen watch. This was confirmed by the Federal Tribunal, which ruled on Thursday, drawing the curtain on a lengthy saga involving the rare timepiece and establishing Ono's claim to what is more than just a luxury watch—it's a piece of her late husband's legacy.
The Patek Philippe 2499, initially gifted by Ono to Lennon for his 40th birthday, holds substantial value—about $4.51 million, to be precise. This exquisite watch features sentimental engraving on its back, reading: "(JUST LIKE) STARTING OVER LOVE YOKO 10·9·1980 N.Y.C," referencing their collaborative spirit just two months before Lennon's tragic assassination. Such deeply personal items often transcend mere monetary value for families, carrying memories tied to emotional moments of love and loss.
The ruling echoes decisions made by Geneva courts previously, which had already sided with Ono. It wasn't just about the watch's green light toward her possession; it emphasized legal boundaries and historical ownership rights, which are particularly important when the item has been taken through dubious means.
At the core of this legal dispute was the Italian man who bought the watch at auction years after it was stolen. This man claimed he had acquired it legitimately. Throughout the court proceedings, he tapped various extradition treaty loopholes, acknowledging shadows of doubt lying behind the clear documentation of the auction. The mechanics of how the watch passed through hands were almost as complex as the artistry of the watch itself, making its story nearly cinematic.
The watch was taken from Ono’s residence by the couple's Turkish chauffeur back in 2006. After this theft, the watch was seemingly lost to history. It changed hands several times and eventually ended up with the Italian seller who bought it from a German auction house without knowledge of its sordid past. Ono discovered the theft only in 2014 after being alerted by legal representatives investigating the watch’s value for its new owner—yet another twist of fate.
Sean Lennon, their son, added emotional weight to the legal battle by stating the incident of the watch being stolen was particularly painful for him. He characterized the theft as taking advantage of his mother during her vulnerable moments after losing her partner. Lennon voiced to The New Yorker, “He took advantage of a widow at a vulnerable time.” That line, echoing across the media, struck home for many who understood the personal loss tied to such public disputes.
Not only did the court ruling restore the watch's rightful ownership, but it also highlighted the intentionality behind its gift. The Supreme Court noted, "There was no evidence to show Yoko Ono intended to donate to the driver something as special as the watch.” This clarification strongly reinforced the principle of ownership where sentimental and intrinsic value matters just as much as financial worth.
With its return eminent, conversations around the watch may soon turn to its eventual display or preservation plans. Ono, who has cultivated her own artistic legacy, might view this not only as reclaiming her property but preserving the memory of her shared life with John Lennon.
Further developments around the watch's return to Ono remain speculative, but as of now, it rests safely with the appellant’s lawyer based in Geneva. The quest for its return wasn’t just about ownership; it symbolized the lengths to which art and emotional bonds extend, even across decades and legal frameworks.
For Ono, the court's ruling marks not just the reclaiming of the watch but reinforces her perpetual link to Lennon and the creative partnership they shared. While the world watched on, the saga serves as both poignant and emblematic of the relationships intertwined with art, music, and memory, as this court case approached its conclusion.
