SFKS secured clients’ victory in the Court of Appeal which, for the first time in Hong Kong, considered a claim of fraudulent calumny in the context of a contested will: Re The Estate of Ip Chan Kee CACV 116/2025, [2026] HKCA 1443.

The Court of Appeal unprecedentedly applied the judgment in Edwards v Edwards [2007] WTLR 1387 at §47 on the approach for avoiding a testamentary disposition on the grounds of fraud (fraudulent calumny).

The party who asserted fraudulent calumny must prove that: (1) there has been a false representation; (2) it was made to the testator; (3) it was about the character of an existing or potential beneficiary; (4) it was made for the purpose of inducing the testator to alter his testamentary dispositions; (5) the representor made it knowing it to be untrue or being reckless as to its truth; and (6) the disputed will was made only because of the fraudulent calumny.

Applying the 6 elements to be proved by the defendants asserting fraudulently calumny, the Court of Appeal held as follows:

(1) The Court of Appeal upheld the finding that the defendants failed to discharge the burden of proving that the representations by the younger son to the deceased father (“Representations”) were false.

(2) There was no dispute that the Representations were made to the father.

(3) The Court of Appeal, unlike the trial judge, found that the Representations speaks of the character of the elder son.

(4) The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge’s finding that the defendants failed to prove that the Representations were made with the specific purpose of inducing the father to alter his testamentary dispositions.

(5) Following (1), the Court of Appeal rejected the contention that the younger son knew that the Representations were false;

(6) The Court of Appeal refused to interfere with the trial judge’s conclusion that the subject will of the father was not proved to be induced by fraudulent calumny.

This Judgment sets a landmark precedent on how factual findings shall be analyzed with corresponding evidence, or interfered by the appellate court with respect to each of the 6 key elements in the context of fraudulent calumny.

This case is led by our Managing Partner Mr. Roy Leung, assisted by Senior Associate Ms. Koey Wong and Associate Mr. Manson Chan. SFKS takes this opportunity to thank Counsel Mr. Jonathan Chang SC and Ms. Esther Mak for their thorough and able assistance in this appeal.

‍