SFKS is pleased to announce a successful outcome for our client before the Court of Appeal in Choi Wan Sheung Nancy v Choi Si Ming Danny and Another [2026] HKCA 997. On 12 June 2026, the Court of Appeal dismissed the Defendant’s appeal and upheld the judgment of the Court of First Instance in favour of our client, the First Plaintiff therein.

The dispute arose from the administration of the estate of the parties’ late mother and concerned, among other matters, the Defendant’s sale of an estate property in Hung Hom (the “HH Property”) and the beneficial ownership of a property in Causeway Bay (the “CWB Property”). The Defendant, who was the executor of the estate, contended that he had acquired our client’s and other beneficiaries’ interests in the estate and that our client held her interest in the CWB Property on trust for him.

At first instance, the Court of First Instance rejected the Defendant’s claims. The Court found that the Defendant had breached his duties as executor by selling the HH Property at an undervalue and ordered him to compensate our client for her one-fifth share of the difference between the sale price and the market value. The Court also declared that the beneficial interests in the CWB Property should be apportioned by reference to the parties’ respective financial contributions, with our client entitled to a 72.2105% beneficial interest.

On appeal, the Court of Appeal accepted our client’s position and dismissed the Defendant’s appeal. The Court held that there was no proper basis to interfere with the trial judge’s findings of fact and credibility, and that the Court of First Instance was entitled to reject the Defendant’s case on the alleged acquisition of the our client’s and other beneficiaries’ interests and his claim to sole beneficial ownership of the CWB Property. The Court of Appeal further awarded our client the costs of the appeal.

This result is a welcome affirmation of our client’s rights following a long-running family and estate dispute. It also demonstrates SFKS’s experience in handling contentious probate, trust, property and appellate disputes, including cases involving executor duties, beneficial ownership and complex factual challenges.

This case serves as a timely reminder to litigants aggrieved by a first-instance decision: an appeal is not a retrial, nor does it provide another open avenue to easily disturb a trial judge’s findings of fact. As cited by Mr Justice Anderson Chow, a first instance trial on the merits should be “the main event”, rather than a “tryout on the road”. An appellate court will accord substantial deference to a trial judge’s findings of fact and credibility assessments given their unique “heard and seen” advantage and holistic familiarity with the case, something which an appellate court lacks. Trying to do otherwise would be a waste of judicial resources.

This case was led by our Consultant Mr. Tommy Tam and our Partner Ms. Jenny Wong and assisted by our Associates Ms. Koey Wong and Mr. Tommy Lam. SFKS also take this opportunity to thank Counsel Stoney Chan for his thorough and able assistance throughout.

Full judgment can be found at legalref.judiciary.hk/lrs/common/ju/ju_frame.jsp?DIS=181798&currpage=T.

‍