French Montana has resolved a high-stakes civil lawsuit filed by two Swiss men—Justo Obiang and Samir Gato—who accused the Grammy-nominated rapper of borrowing and refusing to return a luxury Richard Mille RM-59-01 watch valued at over $1 million, according to court documents filed on July 27, 2026.
The legal saga, which wound through the courts after beginning as an alleged casual swap between acquaintances, has officially drawn to a close. Attorneys representing Obiang, Gato, and the artist born Karim Kharbouch submitted a joint filing indicating that all active disputes have been settled out of court. While the exact financial figures and terms of the resolution remain confidential, the agreement brings a definitive halt to a multi-pronged legal battle that dragged high-end luxury assets and international travel into civil court.
Here is the kicker: the core of the dispute relied as much on horological authenticity as it did on breach of contract. According to initial court filings, what started as friendly post-show camaraderie in Geneva back in 2015 turned contentious a decade later over a timepiece that commands seven-figure sums on the secondary market.
The Bottom Line
- The Core Dispute: Swiss nationals Justo Obiang and Samir Gato sued French Montana in October, alleging he failed to return an authentic Richard Mille RM-59-01 borrowed for Paris Fashion Week in January 2025.
- The Counter-Claim: The plaintiffs claimed the rapper offered his own diamond-encrusted Richard Mille as collateral, which they later discovered was allegedly counterfeit.
- The Resolution: Attorneys for both sides filed notice on Monday, July 27, 2026, confirming the matter is resolved without any formal admission of liability, fault, or wrongdoing.
From Geneva Friendships to Paris Runways
The relationship between the multi-platinum recording artist and the two Swiss plaintiffs dates back over a decade. Court documents detail that Obiang and Gato first crossed paths with French Montana following a 2015 concert performance in Geneva, Switzerland, maintaining a friendly rapport in the years that followed.
The friction began in 2024 during a video shoot in Egypt. According to the lawsuit, the rapper repeatedly attempted to trade his own Richard Mille timepiece for the rare RM-59-01 jointly owned by Obiang and Gato. When those requests were rebuffed, the dynamic shifted from an attempted trade to a short-term loan.
French Montana allegedly asked to borrow the high-end watch specifically for Paris Fashion Week in January 2025, promising to return it within 30 days. To ease their hesitation, the star reportedly offered his own diamond-encrusted watch as collateral. Trusting his celebrity status and public reputation, the owners agreed.
Unraveling the Claims: Conversion, Fraud, and Counterfeit Collateral
When the 30-day window expired, the timepiece did not make its way back to Switzerland. Text message exchanges cited in the initial complaint captured the growing friction between the parties. When Obiang texted, Are you trying to keep my [watch]?
the rapper allegedly replied, never my bro,
and promised to travel to Paris to retrieve and swap the items, an action that plaintiffs stated never materialized.
To compound matters, the collateral left behind proved worthless in the eyes of the plaintiffs. Upon closer inspection, the diamond-encrusted Richard Mille provided by the artist was allegedly a counterfeit. Faced with the permanent loss of their asset, the duo pursued aggressive legal remedies.
The October lawsuit formally accused the entertainer of conversion—the civil law equivalent of theft—alongside fraudulent misrepresentation, unjust enrichment, and replevin. Under legal principles governing replevin, plaintiffs demand the direct return of specific personal property wrongfully withheld by a defendant.
Legal Mechanics of High-Value Luxury Disputes
| Case Detail | Plaintiff Claims | Legal Status |
|---|---|---|
| The Asset | Authentic Richard Mille RM-59-01 (valued over $1M USD) | Disputed property subject to return or settlement |
| The Collateral | Diamond-encrusted Richard Mille provided by defendant | Alleged by plaintiffs to be counterfeit |
| Causes of Action | Conversion, fraudulent misrepresentation, unjust enrichment, replevin | Resolved via out-of-court filing on July 27, 2026 |
Monday’s filing explicitly emphasized that the settlement does not constitute an admission of liability, fault, or wrongdoing by any party.
Both legal teams declined to comment further on the specific financial settlements or the physical whereabouts of the disputed Swiss timepiece.
What are your thoughts on how celebrities handle high-value collateral and private loans? Let us know in the comments below.
