HONG KONG: There was another twist yesterday in the strange court confrontation over who will inherit the estate of Nina Wang, with her family alleging that a will favoring famed feng shui master Tony Chan was a ritual will or a fung shui will, meant to be burnt at her funeral.

Lawyers representing the family of Asia's wealthiest woman argued the fung shui master persuaded Wang to draw up the symbolic will as part of feng shui practice. Instead of burning the will as he was instructed and as tradition dictated, Chan may have retained the document, an expert report said.

Chan's lawyer, Edward Chan challenged the report saying it was unfair and groundless to accuse his client of fraud on the basis of a report prepared by another fung shui master.

He attacked the report point by point. Chan noted that the expert report compiled by another fung shui expert for the Chinachem Charitable Foundation warned of potentially serious consequences if a unscrupulous fung shui master were to swap documents in such a case, the Court of First Instance heard yesterday.

The 2006 will names Chan as the sole beneficiary of her estate, while another will dated 2002 submitted by the foundation stipulated that the proceeds of the estate should be used for charitable work.

Parts of the report compiled by the foundation's fung shui master Szeto Fa-ching were read out by Edward Chan at the pre-trial hearing.

The report referred to fung shui terms and phrases: the focus of fung shui was to change the course of a person's life. The report spoke of the existence of a fung shui will. While acknowledging the existence of the fung shui will, the report stated that fung shui tradition demands such a will be burnt at the close of the author's funeral.

Thus the report concluded that if the 2006 will was a fung shui will, it would have been burned in Wang's funeral and would not be presented to the court as evidence.

Tony Chan's counsel took exception to the analysis. He quoted from the report: "If there was a malevolent fung shui master keeping information that should not be kept through swapping, there could be a serious consequence."

Edward Chan told the court that the statement implicitly carries an allegation against Tony Chan.

He noted also the foundation had initially argued that Wang signed the 2006 will under duress from Chan and more recently had claimed the will naming Tony Chan as the beneficiary was an outright forgery.

Court of First Instance judge Justice Johnson Lam Man-hon said the court will not rule on whether fung shui will exists, and whether Tong Chan is a good fung shui master.

At yesterday's hearing, the court approved Chinachem's petition to amend its pleading, submitting into evidence the analysis of handwriting expert Robert Radley claiming the 2006 will was a forgery. Justice Lam also agreed to the petition by the foundation's senior counsel Denis Chang, to hear Radley's testimony May 18th and 19th. The testimony will come after the four witnesses who attested to the two wills have given their accounts.

Counsel for Tony Chan argued that the testimony of Radley, whose analysis is for the foundation's forgery claim, should be delayed. He submitted that court should first examine prevailing conditions at the time Wang signed the documents.

Another pre-trial is scheduled on next Thursday. The trial itself is to begin May 11.

(HK Edition 04/15/2009 page1)