1. Introduction: A Fortune Like No Other

The estate of Nina Wang remains the largest and most dramatic probate battle ever fought in Hong Kong's courts. At its peak, an estimated HK$83 billion to HK$100 billion was at stake — a fortune built over decades through Chinachem Group, one of Hong Kong's most prominent property developers. The case involved everything a legal thriller demands: kidnapping, secret lovers, forged wills, handwriting experts, and ultimately a 12-year prison sentence.

For families in Hong Kong navigating their own estate matters, the Nina Wang saga offers profound and practical lessons about the importance of clear, properly witnessed wills, the dangers of undue influence, and the devastating consequences that can unfold when estate planning is left ambiguous.

This article tells the full story — from Nina Wang's rise as Asia's richest woman to the final criminal conviction of her feng shui master — and distills the key takeaways for anyone managing an estate in Hong Kong.

2. Nina Wang: From Shanghai to Hong Kong's Richest Woman

Nina Wang, born Kung Yu Sum (龔如心) on 29 September 1937 in Shanghai, grew up in a family with roots in Wenzhou, Zhejiang Province. As a young girl, she was a childhood playmate of Teddy Wang (王德輝), whose father Wang Din-shin had established a paint and chemical manufacturing business that would eventually grow into the Chinachem Group — one of Hong Kong's largest property development conglomerates.

In 1955, when Nina was just 18 and Teddy was 22, the two childhood friends married. Together, they would transform Chinachem from a mid-sized chemical company into a property empire with holdings across Hong Kong, including major commercial and residential developments.

Nina Wang became famous not only for her immense wealth but also for her distinctive personal style. Well into her sixties, she was known for wearing pigtails and miniskirts, earning her the nickname "Little Sweetie" (小甜甜) in the Hong Kong media. Behind her youthful appearance, however, was a shrewd businesswoman who would prove her mettle through extraordinary adversity.

3. The Kidnapping of Teddy Wang

The First Kidnapping (1983)

On 12 April 1983, Teddy and Nina Wang's Mercedes was hijacked on a Hong Kong road. Teddy was dragged from the vehicle and held captive, chained to a bed for eight harrowing days. Nina paid a ransom of HK$33 million (approximately US$4.2 million at the time) to secure his release. The ordeal left the family shaken but intact.

The Second Kidnapping (1990)

Tragedy struck again on 10 April 1990. Teddy Wang was kidnapped a second time, but on this occasion, the outcome was far worse. Despite extensive searches and negotiations, Teddy was never found. His body was never recovered. For nearly a decade, Nina Wang fought to maintain hope while simultaneously running the Chinachem empire single-handedly.

In 1999, Teddy Wang was officially declared dead by a Hong Kong court. With this declaration, the battle over his vast fortune began in earnest.

4. The First Will Battle: Teddy Wang's Estate (1999-2005)

After Teddy Wang was declared dead, the first major will dispute erupted. At least three different wills circulated through the court system, and the battle pitted Nina Wang against her father-in-law, Wang Din-shin.

The Competing Wills

A 1968 will left Teddy's estate to his father, Wang Din-shin. However, Nina produced a 1990 will — purportedly signed by Teddy just before his second kidnapping — that ceded the entire estate to her. This will contained the romantic phrase "one life, one love" in English, with the rest written in Chinese. It also stated that the Wang family had been "disappointing."

The First Court Decision (2002)

After a gruelling 171-day courtroom battle, High Court Justice David Yam declared the 1990 will a forgery on 21 November 2002. He awarded all of Teddy Wang's estimated HK$128 million estate (the portion under direct dispute) to Wang Din-shin. Nina Wang was devastated.

The Court of Final Appeal Reversal (2005)

Nina Wang appealed, and in September 2005, the Court of Final Appeal — Hong Kong's highest court — overturned the lower court's ruling and declared the 1990 will valid. The forgery charge was dropped, publicly exonerating Nina Wang. She regained control of the Chinachem empire.

5. Nina Wang's Death and the 2006 Will

Nina Wang died on 3 April 2007 at the age of 69, succumbing to cancer. At the time of her death, Forbes estimated her net worth at US$4.2 billion, making her Asia's richest woman. Her Chinachem Group controlled vast property holdings across Hong Kong.

Nina had executed a will in 2002 leaving her entire estate to the Chinachem Charitable Foundation, a charitable trust she and Teddy had established in 1988. The will reflected her desire to use the fortune for philanthropic purposes, including the creation of a Chinese award equivalent to the Nobel Prize.

However, shortly after her death, a second will emerged — dated 2006 — that changed everything. This will purportedly left Nina's entire fortune to a single individual: her feng shui master, Tony Chan Chun-chuen.

6. Tony Chan: The Feng Shui Master's Claim

Tony Chan Chun-chuen (later known as Peter Chan) was a feng shui practitioner who had become a close associate of Nina Wang in her later years. Chan claimed that he and Nina Wang had been secret lovers for many years, and that she had confided in him completely.

According to Chan's account, Nina Wang had drafted a new will in 2006 naming him as the sole beneficiary of her entire estate — estimated at HK$83 billion (approximately US$10.7 billion). If upheld, this would have made Tony Chan one of the wealthiest individuals in Asia overnight.

The Chinachem Charitable Foundation immediately challenged the 2006 will, setting the stage for what would become the most consequential probate trial in Hong Kong history.

The Stakes

7. The Civil Trial: 40 Days in Court

The civil case, captioned "In the Estate of Nina Kung, also known as Nina Wang, between Chinachem Charitable Foundation Limited (Plaintiff) and Chan Chun Chuen (1st Defendant)," commenced in May 2009 before High Court Justice Johnson Lam Man-hon.

Over 40 trial days, the court heard testimony from handwriting experts, family members, employees, and associates of both Nina Wang and Tony Chan. The central question was deceptively simple: Did Nina Wang actually sign the 2006 will?

Tony Chan's Case

Chan's legal team argued that:

• He and Nina Wang had maintained a secret romantic relationship for years
• Nina Wang had come to depend on him personally and spiritually
• She had genuine reasons to change her will in his favour
• The 2006 will was authentic and reflected her true wishes

Chinachem Foundation's Case

The Foundation's legal team countered that:

• The signature on the 2006 will was a forgery — a "high-quality simulation"
• Nina Wang's true intent was clearly expressed in the 2002 will
• Tony Chan had exploited his position of influence over a vulnerable elderly woman
• The circumstances surrounding the creation of the 2006 will were highly suspicious

8. The Handwriting Evidence

The pivotal evidence in the trial came from competing handwriting experts, whose testimony would ultimately determine the fate of billions of dollars.

Robert Radley (Expert for Chinachem Foundation)

Robert Radley, a handwriting analyst retained by the Chinachem Charitable Foundation, conducted an extensive analysis comparing the signature on the 2006 will against 125 known signatures and writings of Nina Wang. His conclusion was unequivocal: the signature was not genuine.

Radley identified what he called a "tremendous accumulation of differences" between the "Nina TH Wang" signature on the 2006 will and Nina Wang's authentic signatures. He pointed out at least eight specific discrepancies in letter formation, pen pressure, stroke sequence, and overall character. His professional opinion was that the signature was a "high-quality simulation" — skilfully forged but ultimately detectable.

Paul Westwood (Expert for Tony Chan)

Tony Chan's defence team engaged Paul Westwood, who took a different analytical approach. Westwood focused on similarities between the disputed signature and samples of Wang's genuine handwriting, arguing that certain details overlooked by other experts supported authenticity.

However, Judge Lam found Radley's analysis more persuasive, noting that the similarities Westwood identified were exactly what one would expect from a high-quality forgery — the forger had carefully studied Nina Wang's authentic signature and replicated its general appearance while failing to reproduce the subtle, unconscious habits that make every person's handwriting unique.

9. The 2010 Civil Ruling

On 2 February 2010, Justice Johnson Lam delivered his landmark judgment. In a detailed 260-page decision covering 935 points, he ruled definitively:

Key findings from Justice Lam's ruling:

• The signature was forged: The court accepted the handwriting experts' testimony that the signature on the 2006 will was "a high-quality simulation" and not Nina Wang's genuine signature
• The love affair was accepted: Interestingly, the court accepted Tony Chan's claim that he and Nina Wang had been secret lovers, but held that this did not establish the authenticity of the will
• The 2002 will prevailed: The earlier will, leaving everything to the Chinachem Charitable Foundation, was upheld as Nina Wang's true testament
• Chan's motives were clear: The court found that Chan's claim was driven by greed rather than genuine testamentary intent

The Appeal (2011)

Tony Chan appealed Justice Lam's ruling to the Court of Appeal. On 15 February 2011, the Court of Appeal rejected his appeal, affirming the lower court's finding that the 2006 will was a forgery. The appellate judges found no basis to disturb Justice Lam's careful evaluation of the handwriting evidence and witness testimony.

10. The Criminal Trial and 12-Year Sentence

Following the civil proceedings, the Hong Kong authorities brought criminal charges against Tony Chan (who had by then changed his name to Peter Chan Chun-chuen). He was charged with forgery and using a false instrument — serious criminal offences under Hong Kong law.

The Trial and Verdict

The criminal trial took place in the High Court before Justice Andrew Macrae. After more than 20 hours of deliberation, a jury found Peter Chan guilty on 4 July 2013 of forging Nina Wang's will and of using the forged document to make his fraudulent claim.

The Sentencing

On 5 July 2013, Justice Andrew Macrae sentenced Peter Chan to 12 years imprisonment on each count, to be served concurrently. In his sentencing remarks, Justice Macrae delivered a withering assessment of Chan's conduct:

The Failed Appeal (2015)

Chan appealed his criminal conviction in 2015, but the Court of Appeal upheld both the conviction and the sentence. The Chinachem Charitable Foundation subsequently filed a bankruptcy petition against Chan to recover legal costs.

Criminal Case Summary

11. The Chinachem Charitable Foundation

With the legal battles resolved, Nina Wang's fortune was confirmed as belonging to the Chinachem Charitable Foundation, as specified in her 2002 will. The Foundation, established by Nina and Teddy Wang in 1988, continues to operate as one of Hong Kong's largest charitable organisations.

Nina Wang's 2002 will had contained ambitious provisions for the use of her fortune:

• The establishment of a supervisory body involving the Chinese premier and the United Nations Secretary General
• The creation of a "Chinese Nobel Prize" — an award equivalent to the Nobel Prize for Chinese achievements
• Broad charitable purposes across education, healthcare, and social welfare

However, the administration of the Foundation itself has not been without controversy. In 2015, a Hong Kong court ruled that the Foundation must follow Nina Wang's wishes in administering her HK$83 billion fortune, acting as trustee rather than outright beneficiary. This distinction meant the Foundation was obligated to use the funds in accordance with Nina's charitable vision, not for its own institutional purposes.

12. Complete Timeline

13. Lessons for Hong Kong Families

The Nina Wang case offers critical lessons that apply to every family managing an estate in Hong Kong, regardless of size.

Lesson 1: Execute a Clear, Properly Witnessed Will

The entire Chinachem saga — spanning decades and costing untold millions in legal fees — could have been prevented with clearer estate planning. Wills should be drafted by qualified solicitors, properly witnessed by two independent witnesses, and stored securely with copies held by trusted advisors.

Lesson 2: Beware of Undue Influence

Tony Chan exploited his position as Nina Wang's trusted feng shui advisor to manufacture a fraudulent will. This is an extreme example, but undue influence is a common ground for challenging wills in Hong Kong. Elderly individuals are particularly vulnerable to pressure from caregivers, advisors, or even family members.

Lesson 3: Update Your Will Regularly

Nina Wang's 2002 will ultimately prevailed, but the existence of a purported 2006 will created years of expensive litigation. Regular will reviews — ideally every 3-5 years or after any major life event — with proper documentation of each update can prevent disputes.

Lesson 4: Forensic Evidence Can Detect Forgeries

The case demonstrates that modern forensic handwriting analysis is sophisticated enough to detect even high-quality forgeries. Families should take comfort in knowing that fraudulent wills can be exposed, but they should also understand that proving forgery requires expensive expert testimony and lengthy court proceedings.

Lesson 5: Charitable Giving Requires Proper Structure

Nina Wang's vision for a "Chinese Nobel Prize" and major charitable initiatives required proper trust structures to implement. Families considering charitable bequests should work with experienced solicitors to create clear, enforceable charitable trusts with proper governance provisions.

Lesson 6: Estate Litigation Is Extremely Costly

The Chinachem case involved multiple trials over more than a decade. The legal fees alone were estimated at over HK$100 million. For ordinary families, even a fraction of such costs can be devastating. Proper estate planning is infinitely cheaper than estate litigation.

14. Conclusion

The Nina Wang Chinachem estate battle stands as a monument to both the perils of inadequate estate planning and the resilience of Hong Kong's legal system in protecting legitimate testamentary wishes. A fortune of HK$100 billion was nearly stolen through the brazen forgery of a single document, but the courts — through meticulous forensic analysis and careful judicial reasoning — ensured that Nina Wang's true wishes prevailed.

For the feng shui master Tony Chan, his "unparalleled greed" earned him 12 years behind bars. For the Chinachem Charitable Foundation, the ruling secured one of the largest charitable endowments in Asian history. And for Hong Kong families everywhere, the case serves as both a warning and a guide: plan your estate carefully, document your wishes clearly, and seek professional advice before it is too late.

If you are dealing with a deceased relative's estate in Hong Kong — whether it involves property, bank accounts, stocks, or other assets — the lessons from the Nina Wang case underscore the importance of working with experienced professionals who can help you navigate the process efficiently and protect your family's interests.