Dispute concerns ultimate dispersal of the deceased magnate's estate

A court confrontation has begun as the government and the Chinachem Charitable Foundation (CCF) square off in a dispute over how the HK$83 billion estate of the late Hong Kong magnate, Nina Wong, may be dispersed.

Central to the argument is the contention by the Secretary for Justice, on the one hand, that Chinachem, founded by Wang and her late husband, should serve only as trustee to the estate, and receive payment only as the trustee. The estate then would be doled out according to the instructions of Wang's hand written will.

Chinachem, on the other hand, argues that the bequest was a no strings attached gift, and that the foundation has the right to disperse the entire estate, based on the judgment of the foundation's five member board of directors.

The latest confrontation comes nearly two years after the foundation was awarded the legendary fortune of the late Nina Wang, which was at the center of two epic probate battles spanning more than a decade.

The matter at hand is whether Wang's "hand-made" will, lacking the precision of a lawyer drafted document according to London barrister Simon Taube, representing the administration, should be read posthumously as a list of commands given by the eccentric business magnate, once called Asia's wealthiest woman. The foundation's lawyers describe the will as a series of hopes and aspirations.

If the High Court rules the foundation may take payment only as a trustee, the courts will also have to hammer out the terms of the trust. If the fortune is found to be a gift, the court will be called upon to determine whether the foundation may alter its mission statement and how it may spend the money.

Taube said the language of the will amounted to a series of directions by Wang, and that her wishes were not aspirations but rather the mandatory resolve of a hands-on, very successful businesswoman with a strong character who "gave orders and expected them to be complied with."

He also noted the foundation had no experience handling large investments in securities, which make up a bulk of the fortune aside from real estate holdings. Taube contended the foundation was merely a tax efficient conduit for Chinachem Group companies to make charitable donations, as identified as Wang.

He added, the foundation rarely had more than HK$5 million in operating net assets.

Taube also noted that stipulations in the will, directing that certain individuals should receive support, are inconsistent with a charity's ban on benefiting individuals.

Lawyers representing the foundation will argue their case before Justice Jeremy Poon Shiu-chor on Tuesday. The foundation has interpreted most of Wang's will as non-binding wishes.

Wang's will bequeaths the entirety of her assets to the foundation, to be used for charitable purposes. The first of the will's four clauses states the foundation should be overseen by a supervisory organization to include, premier of China, secretary general of the UN and the Chief Executive of Hong Kong.

Taube added Wang was in defacto control of the foundation while alive and that her push for a supervisory body implied she did not expect the board, solely, to control dispersal of the estate.

The second clause calls for the foundation to continue its charitable operations while setting up a fund to support a Chinese award honor, analogous with the Nobel Prize and recognized world wide.

The third clause calls for the foundation's board of directors to safeguard and expand the Chinachem Group business empire in perpetuity.

The fourth clause stipulates that all medical expenses of Wang's sister in law to be paid from the estate. That clause also calls for the university expenses of the children of Teddy Wang's siblings be paid, and that the higher learning needs of Chinachem Group's more than 3,000 employees and their children also be supported by the foundation.

tim@chinadailyhk.com

(HK Edition 12/18/2012 page1)