{"id":"court_ctb_441_11","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":441,"sub_number":11,"doc_type":"EXHIBIT","filed_date":"2022-05-20","title":"Exhibit UCC-11 PAX's Amended Statement of Claim dated October 16, 2020 in Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund LP v. G","summary_zh":null,"summary_en":null,"body_en":"# Exhibit UCC-11\n\nPAX's Amended Statement of Claim dated October 16, 2020 in Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund LP v. Genever Holdings Corp. et al, Claim No. BVIHCM 0137 of 2020 (Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court, Virgin Islands, Commercial Division)\n\n|                       |                            | 22-50073 |    |  |\n|-----------------------|----------------------------|----------|----|--|\n| Ho Wan Kwok<br>IN RE: |                            |          |    |  |\n|                       |                            |          |    |  |\n| UCC                   |                            |          | 11 |  |\n|                       |                            |          |    |  |\n|                       | 5/25/2022 Admitted in Full |          |    |  |\n|                       |                            | P.E.     |    |  |\n|                       |                            |          |    |  |\n|                       |                            |          |    |  |\n\n**Case Number :BVIHCOM2020/0137** Case 22-50073 Doc 406-11 Filed 05/20/22 Entered 05/20/22 12:13:10 Page 2 of\n\n17\n\n441-11 05/25/22 05/26/22 15:59:53\n\n**THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT**\n\n**VIRGIN ISLANDS**\n\n**IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE**\n\n**COMMERCIAL DIVISION**\n\n**Claim No BVIHCM 0137 of 2020**\n\n**BETWEEN**\n\n# **PACIFIC ALLIANCE ASIA OPPORTUNITY FUND LP**\n\n**Claimant**\n\n**And**\n\n#### **GEN EVER HOLDINGS CORP BRAVO LUCK LIMITED KWOK HO WAN (also known as MILES KWOK, HO WAN KWOK and GUO WEN GUI) QIANG GUO (also known as QUO QIANG and MILESON KWOK)**\n\n**Defendants**\n\n# **AMENDED STATEMENT OF CLAIM**\n\n# **THE PARTIES**\n\n- <sup>1</sup> The Claimant **(PAX)** is an investment fund organised as an exempted limited partnership under the laws of the Cayman Islands.\n- 2 The First Defendant **(Genever BVI)** is a company incorporated in the British Virgin Islands on 13 February 2015, having its Registered Office address at Intertrust Corporate Services (BVI) Limited, Ritter House, Wickhams Cay II, Road Town, Tortola, VG1110, British Virgin Islands.\n- 3 The Second Defendant **(Bravo Luck)** is also a company incorporated in the British Virgin Islands on 2 April 2013, having its Registered Office at Vistra (BVI) Limited **(Vistra),** Vistra Corporate Services Centre, Wickhams Cay II, Road Town, Tortola, VG1110, British Virgin Islands.\n- 4 The Third Defendant **(Mr Kwok)** is <sup>a</sup> fugitive from Chinese justice, currently resident in the State of New York, United States of America, avoiding fraud, bribery and corruption, and money laundering charges in the People's Republic of China.\n\n**Submitted Date:16/10/2020 10:47**\n\n**Filed Date:16/10/2020 10:47**\n\n**Fees Paid:112.91**\n\n- <sup>5</sup> The Fourth Defendant is the Third Defendant's 33 -year-old son, having been born on 22 February 1987 **(Mr Guo).**\n- 6 As is pleaded more fully below, at all relevant times:\n\t- (i) The Third Defendant was the sole Director and Sole Shareholder of Genever BVI, as well as the holder of 50% of the shares issued by the Fourth Defendant after 26 January 2015;\n\t- (ii) The Fourth Defendant is and was the sole (registered) Director of Bravo Luck, but he acted at all relevant times as <sup>a</sup> mere cypher and nominee for his father, the Third Defendant who at all relevant times directed the activities of his son and Bravo Luck; and\n\t- (iii) The Third Defendant therefore also acted as <sup>a</sup> de facto or shadow director of Bravo Luck, and the actions and knowledge of the Third Defendant are to be attributed both to Genever BVI and to Bravo Luck, whilst the actions and knowledge of the Fourth Defendant are to be attributed to Bravo Luck.\n\n# **KWOK'S LIABILITY TO PAX**\n\n- 7 On or around 4 February 2008, Spirit Charter Investment Limited **(Spirit** Charter) entered into <sup>a</sup> loan facility agreement with PAX (the **2008 Loan** Facility). The principle amount of the loan advanced by PAX to Spirit Charter under the 2008 Loan Facility was US\\$30 million. Furthermore, Mr Kwok, as required by the 2008 Loan Facility, executed <sup>a</sup> personal guarantee of Spirit Charter's repayment obligations to PAX (the **2008 Guarantee).** The terms of the 2008 Loan Facility were amended on 12 March 2008 (the **Amended 2008 Loan Facility).**\n- 8 Pursuant to a Deed of Settlement dated 17 September 2009 (the **2009 Deed of Settlement),** Shiny Times Limited **(Shiny Times),** <sup>a</sup> company controlled by Mr Kwok, assumed Spirit Charter's debt to PAX under the Amended 2008 Loan Facility. As at the date of the 2009 Deed of Settlement, the outstanding amount inclusive of unpaid interest pursuant to the Amended 2008 Loan Facility was agreed by the parties as US\\$45,357,534.25.\n- 9 On 18 November 2009, as required by the 2009 Deed of Settlement, Mr Kwok entered into the terms of <sup>a</sup> new Guarantee (the **2009 Guarantee)** by which he reaffirmed his guarantee of the repayment obligations (assumed by Shiny Times) to PAX under the terms of the Amended 2008 Loan Facility.\n- 10 On or about 12 March 2010, Shiny Times, PAX and Mr Kwok entered into <sup>a</sup> revised loan facility in which they agreed to extend the date for repayment of the debt from 12 March 2010 to 31 December 2010 (the **2010 Loan** Facility), which debt Mr Kwok continued to guarantee pursuant to the 2009\n\nGuarantee. As at the date of the 2010 Loan Facility, the debt was agreed by the parties as US\\$47,625,410.96.\n\n- 11 Having failed to repay the 2010 Loan Facility and with Mr Kwok's failure to perform his personal guarantee, the parties entered into <sup>a</sup> new loan facility on 16 March 2011, (the **2011 Loan Facility),** which superseded and replaced the parties' prior agreements pertaining to the outstanding debt to PAX. As at 16 March 2011, the outstanding amount, inclusive of unpaid interest due to PAX pursuant to the Amended 2008 Loan Facility, was agreed by the parties as US\\$46,426,489. The debt was to be repaid by 30 June 2012, but again Mr Kwok failed to so.\n- 12 Also, on 16 March 2011, Mr Kwok entered into the terms of a third Guarantee (the **2011 Guarantee)** by which he personally guaranteed the liability of Shiny Times to PAX under the terms as revised by the 2011 Loan Facility. As at the date of this Statement of Claim, Mr Kwok's liability under the 2011 Guarantee stands at over US\\$112.3 million (exclusive of contractual enforcement costs).\n- 13 Insofar as is material, by clause 2.1 of the 2011 Guarantee, Mr Kwok irrevocably and unconditionally:\n\t- (i) Guaranteed the due and punctual payment of the Obligations (as defined therein), and agreed that promptly upon demand he would pay to PAX all obligations that were due but unpaid.\n\t- (ii) Agreed To pay interest of the rate of 15% per annum accrued from 31 December 2010 to the date on which all such liabilities are paid in full.\n- 14 By clause 5.3 of the 2011 Guarantee Mr Kwok additionally agreed to indemnify and hold PAX fully harmless from and against all and any costs, losses, expenses (including legal fees) and Obligations which PAX may incur as <sup>a</sup> result of the exercise or enforcement by PAX of any of the rights or powers conferred upon it under the Guarantee or by law.\n- 15 Demand was made to the Mr Kwok for payment of the obligations thereunder on 16 October 2015, but that demand went unsatisfied.\n- 16 In breach of his obligations under the 2011 Guarantee, neither Kwok as guarantor, nor Shiny Times as principal obligor (nor anybody on their behalf), has discharged the debt guaranteed by the 2011 Guarantee, or any part of it.\n\n### **THE DEEDS OF SETTLEMENT**\n\n17 On 25 April 2012, following Shiny Times' failure to satisfy the 2011 Loan Facility, Shiny Times and PAX entered into a settlement agreement to which\n\nBeijing Pangu Investment Company Limited **(Beijing Pangu)** (another entity controlled by Mr Kwok) was also a party (the **2012 Deed of** Settlement). It was agreed between the parties to the 2012 Deed of Settlement, and stated therein, that the total amount due to PAX inclusive of interest as at 25 April 2012 was US\\$52 million. The 2012 Deed of Settlement specified that the amount due to PAX would no longer be due or owing upon the satisfaction of the following:\n\n- (a) That Shiny Times make three instalment payments to PAX, each instalment in the sum of US\\$17,333,333; thereafter\n- (b) That PAX complete the purchase of three apartments in Pangu Plaza, Beijing, Peoples Republic of China **(PRC)** owned by Beijing Pangu **(the Pangu Apartments);** and\n- (c) That PAX pay Beijing Pangu the purchase price of the Pangu Apartments in RMB.\n- 18 Shiny Times failed to make any of the three instalment payments as required by the 2012 Deed of Settlement and on 19 April 2013, Shiny Times, Beijing Pangu and PAX entered into a revised settlement agreement (the **2013 Deed of Settlement).** The parties to the 2013 Deed of Settlement agreed that the total amount due to PAX inclusive of interest as at 19 April 2013 was US\\$52 million. The 2013 Deed of Settlement also specified the amount due to PAX would no longer be due or owing upon the satisfaction of the following revised requirements:\n\t- (a) That PAX first complete the purchase of the Pangu apartments. The purchases were to take place in three separate transactions with a purchase price of approximately US\\$5 million each; thereafter\n\t- (b) That Shiny Times make three instalment payments to PAX of approximately US\\$5 million after the completed purchase of each of the Pangu Apartments.\n- 19 Before the transactions specified at paragraphs 18(a) and 18(b) were to take place, however, Shiny Times and Beijing Pangu were required to satisfy <sup>a</sup> number of other conditions precedent relating to, inter a/ia, mortgage, tax and ultimately, title conveyance that were standard requirements in property transactions in the PRC (the **Conditions Precedent).** The 2013 Deed of Settlement specified that the Conditions Precedent were to be completed by 31 July 2013, failing which the 2013 Deed of Settlement would be terminated and the terms of the 2011 Loan Facility and the 2011 Guarantee would come back into full effect.\n- 20 Shiny Times and Beijing Pangu failed to satisfy the Conditions Precedent by 31 July 2013 and were granted <sup>a</sup> series of extensions of time by way of supplemental deeds on 3 December 2013, 15 May 2014 and 11 July 2014.\n\nExcept for the deadline for performance by Beijing Pangu and Mr Kwok, each of the supplemental deeds had the same terms as the 2013 Deed of **Settlement (the Supplemental Deeds of Settlement).**\n\n21 On 10 February 2015, Shiny Times, Beijing Pangu and PAX entered into the final of the Supplemental Deeds of Settlement (the **Final Deed of** Settlement) to grant Mr Kwok and Beijing Pangu <sup>a</sup> further extension until 30 June 2015 to perform the Conditions Precedent. In breach of the Final Deed of Settlement, Mr Kwok and Beijing Pangu failed to perform the Conditions Precedent by the end of June 2015.\n\n(The 2012 Deed of Settlement, the 2013 Deed of Settlement, the Supplemental Deeds of Settlement and the Final Deed of Settlement collectively being the **Deeds of Settlement).**\n\n22 All of the agreements set out in paragraphs 7 to 21 were governed by the laws of the Special Administrative Region of Hong Kong.\n\n# **THE NEW YORK PROCEEDINGS**\n\n- 23 By a Complaint issued before the Supreme Court of the State of New York (the **NY Court)** on 18 April 2017 the Claimant commenced proceedings against Mr Kwok. Insofar as material, in those proceedings (the **NY Proceedings):**\n\t- (a) The Claimant:\n\t\t- (i) Has claimed against Mr Kwok the sums due under the Second Kwok Guarantee in the total sum of US\\$88 million at the time of filing (now, US\\$112.3 million with contractual interest that continues to accrue at 15% per annum, exclusive of contractual enforcement costs).\n\t\t- (H) Has filed an interlocutory motion against Mr Kwok for a Pre Judgement Order of Attachment of a valuable asset (the leasehold for a residential property in Manhattan, New York) held by Genever NY, which is in turn owned by Genever BVI and ultimately beneficially owned by Mr Kwok. The motion was brought on the basis that the corporate veils of those entities should be pierced and that they should be treated as assets of Mr Kwok to be fixed for the enforcement of <sup>a</sup> judgment in the substantive claim stated at paragraph 23(a)(i);\n\t- (b) Mr Kwok:\n\t\t- (i) Initially defended those proceedings on forum and jurisdictional grounds. His jurisdictional defence was ultimately resolved in the\n\nClaimant's favour by the First Department of the Supreme Court, Appellate Division by a ruling dated <sup>5</sup> April 2018.\n\n- (ii) Thereafter, defended those proceedings on the basis that he had settled the debt that was due under the 2011 Facility and 2011 Guarantee by falsely asserting that he had substantially performed the 2013 Deed of Settlement.\n- (iii) Notwithstanding paragraph 23(b)(ii), has very recently entirely reversed course and proceeded to dishonestly advance the false and disingenuous allegations that the various contracts relied upon in that action, including the 2011 Facility, 2011 Guarantee and the Deeds of Settlement, were documents that were not in fact executed by him, and even that they were forged by his Hong Kong -based solicitors in a conspiracy with the PRC Government.\n- 24 On 15 September 2020 the NY Court entered Judgment for the Claimant on those proceedings for <sup>a</sup> sum to be assessed. When that sum isfixed by the NY Court, the Clamant will have the benefit of <sup>a</sup> final judgment for <sup>a</sup> definite sum of money which is enforceable in the British Virgin Islands at common law (the **NY Judgment).**\n- 25 Accordingly, the Claimant expects to become <sup>a</sup> judgment creditor of Mr Kwok, Genever BVI and Genever NY in the NY Proceedings in a substantial sum, currently in excess of \\$112.3m together with interest accruing at 15% per annum, in addition to contractual enforcement costs. The Claimant will consent to these proceedings, or at least the quantification of its claims for damages, being stayed until the NY Court has fixed the amount payable under the NY Judgment.\n- 26 Despite the representations which are pleaded below which Mr Kwok made to the Sherry Netherland as to his financial wherewithal, Mr Kwok has asserted in the NY Proceedings that he does not \"in reality, under the law, own any assets in the United States\" and that he has \"not <sup>a</sup> penny left.\" It is therefore anticipated that he will not comply with the NY Judgment or any judgment given by this Court.\n\n# **THE CONSPIRACY**\n\n- 27 Mr Kwok's liability to the Claimant under the 2011 Guarantee (and its anticipated liability under the NY Judgment) currently stands at over USD\\$112,300,000, exclusive of contractual enforcement costs.\n- 28 Instead of discharging his obligations under the 2011 Guarantee, Mr Kwok diverted approximately US\\$68m to Bravo Luck (which was also approximately the total amount owed by Mr Kwok to PAX at that time) pursuant to <sup>a</sup> scheme hatched among the Defendants to conceal that money in an opaque structure involving Genever BVI so as to enable Mr\n\nKwok to act in continued breach of his contractual obligations to PAX, while using the same amount of money due and owing to PAX at the time to purchase a luxury apartment in New York City, and, ultimately, to avoid enforcement of <sup>a</sup> judgment in the NY Proceedings.\n\n- 29 On a date unknown to the Claimant until after disclosure, Mr Kwok arranged for approximately US\\$70m to be paid from assets of his into an account maintained by Bravo Luck with UBS AG (the **UBS Account).** He did so pursuant to the unlawful conspiracy pleaded below with the intention of defrauding his creditors and thereby causing loss to the Claimant by unlawful means.\n- 30 Furthermore, on dates unknown to the Claimant until after disclosure herein, but after February 2015:\n\t- (i) The First, Second and Fourth Defendants induced, encouraged and facilitated Mr Kwok's various breaches of his contractual obligations to PAX; and\n\t- (ii) The Defendants all wrongfully conspired together with the sole or the predominant intention of injuring the Claimant and/or causing loss to the Claimant, to assist Mr Kwok in evading his liabilities under the 2011 Guarantee, and/or to attempt to render himself judgment proof and/or to cause loss to the Claimant by unlawful means.\n- 31 The Claimant reserves the right to plead further to the Defendants' conspiracy after disclosure. Until then, the best particulars that the Claimant is able to give of this conspiracy are that:\n\n# **PARTICULARS OF CONSPIRACY**\n\n- (i) Genever BVI was incorporated at the behest of Mr Kwok on 13 February 2015 as a vehicle to hold shares in a company incorporated in New York, Genever Holdings, LLC **(Genever NY).** On the same day, Genever BVI allotted 1,000 shares to Mr Kwok, its sole shareholder.\n- (ii) There were no obvious advantages to the incorporation of Genever BVI to hold shares in Genever NY of which PAX is aware; the sole or predominant purpose of incorporating Genever BVI was to enable the beneficial ownership of Genever NY, and therefore of the Residence (defined below), to be concealed and shielded.\n- (iii) On 17 February 2015, Genever NY was incorporated at the behest of Mr Kwok in the State of New York. On or about the same date, Genever NY allotted all of its shares to Genever BVI pursuant to a Limited Company Agreement dated 13 February 2015.\n- (iv) Purportedly on that same day, 17 February 2015, Genever BVI (acting through Mr Kwok) and Genever NY purportedly executed <sup>a</sup> Declaration of Trust (the **Purported DOT).** By the terms of the Purported DOT:\n\t- (I) Genever NY was said to be a special purpose vehicle holding the 18th floor property (Units 1801, 1804, 1807, 1809, 1811) at the Sherry-Netherland (the **Sherry Netherland)** Apartments, 781 Fifth Avenue, New York (the **Residence).**\n\t- (ii) Genever BVI was said to be a special purpose vehicle holding Genever NY.\n\t- (iii) Mr Kwok is said to have made it known to Bravo Luck that \"certain [unidentified and undisclosed] third parties may coown\"the shares issued by Genever NY and/or the Residence.\n- (iv) Mr Kwok is said to have declared that he holds the shares issued by Genever BVI on trust for Bravo Luck.\n- (v) On 26 January 2015, Mr Guo caused Bravo Luck to allot <sup>1</sup> share to Mr Kwok, with the result that the registered shareholders of Bravo Luck were then Mr Kwok and Mr Guo in equal shares.\n- (vi) On a date currently unknown to the Claimant, Mr Kwok caused or arranged monies to be transferred into <sup>a</sup> bank account maintained by Bravo Luck with UBS AG Hong Kong (the **UBS Account).**\n- (vii) On 4 March 2015, Mr Kwok, having induced Bravo Luck and Mr Guo to allow him to unilaterally authorise payments from Bravo Luck's UBS Account arranged for Bravo Luck to transfer the sum of US\\$62,990,781.85 to Ivey Barnum and O'Mara LLC, the Sherry-Netherland's attorneys, in order to acquire the Residence in the name of Genever NY.\n- (viii) On 5 March 2015 the further sum of US\\$6.3m was transferred from the UBS account to Mr Guo, supposedly for his \"own expenses.\" Absent explanation, part of this sum is likely to have been <sup>a</sup> payment to Mr Guo to compensate him for his part in this scheme.\n- (ix) On 5 March 2015 Mr Guo delivered a bankers draft to the Sherry Netherland in the sum of US\\$3,369,000, paid out of the sums transferred to him from the UBS Account. That payment was routed through Mr Guo in an effort to enable Mr Kwok to conceal his beneficial ownership of Genever BVI, Bravo Luck and/or the Residence.\n- 32 The Defendants took these steps notwithstanding the fact that:\n\t- (i) Mr Kwok came under an obligation to pay the Claimant the sum of US\\$46.2 Million under the terms of the 2011 Loan Facility and 2011 Guarantee on 16 March 2011, which debt had grown to over US\\$67m in February 2015 and continues to accrue interest at 15 percent per annum.\n\t- (ii) On 19 April 2013, Pangu came under an obligation to perform the Conditions Precedent and transfer title to the Pangu Apartments to PAX by 31 July 2013 in settlement of the 2011 Loan Facility and Second Guarantee under the terms of the 2013 Deed of Settlement. Three months previously, on 17 January 2013, Mr Guo had become a shareholder in Bravo Luck.\n\t- (iii) On 10 February 2015, Mr Kwok executed the Final Deed of Settlement in an effort to buy time to further and complete the conspiracy pleaded above, knowing full well that ultimately he would be unable to perform the same after the PRC authorities seized his assets (including Beijing Pangu) on or about 2 February 2015. Genever NY and Genever BVI were incorporated within just <sup>a</sup> few days after execution of the Final Deed of Settlement, on 13 February 2015 and 17 February 2015.\n\t- (iv) By the terms of the Final Deed of Settlement, Mr Kwok secured an extension to 30 June 2015 to perform the Conditions Precedent and transfer title to the Pangu Apartments to PAX, which enabled Mr Kwok to use (approximately) the same sum of money he owed PAX at the time to complete the purchase of the Residence on 6 March 2015.\n\n# **THE PURPORTED DECLARATION OF TRUST**\n\n- 33 The Purported DOT is <sup>a</sup> fraud that was not executed on the date that it bears. Without prejudice to the other matters pleaded within this Statement of Claim:\n\t- (i) Genever NY acquired the Residence on 6 March 2015, yet gave its business address in the Purported DOT as being care of the Residence, notwithstanding the fact that the Purported DOT is said to have been executed almost three weeks earlier, on 17 February 2015.\n\t- (ii) The Purported DOT was also expressed in terms that suggested that Genever NY already owned the Residence at the time of its purported execution. That statement was demonstrably untrue: the Residence was not in fact purchased until 6 March 2015, some three weeks later. Indeed, Mr Kwok had not even applied to purchase the\n\nResidence as of 17 February 2015; he first did so on 26 February 2015.\n\n- (iii) Despite the fact that it, if it was genuine, it would have been responsive to PAX's written document requests, the Purported DOT was not produced in the NY Proceedings until 22 April 2019 (months after the close of relevant attachment-related document discovery). Until that time, the consistent position of Mr Kwok, Genever BVI and Genever NY in the NY Proceedings was that Mr Kwok was the beneficial owner of the Residence; and that remained their position even after the Purported DOT was disclosed.\n- 34 Furthermore, the Purported DOT is <sup>a</sup> sham that was not intended to have legal effect as between Bravo Luck and any of the parties thereto, but was devised for the sole purpose of concealing an asset of Mr Kwok from his creditors. In addition to the matters set out above, pending disclosure, the Claimants will rely upon the following additional matters:\n\n# **PARTICULARS**\n\n- (i) Over a year after the Purported DOT was supposedly executed, on and after 29 June 2016, Mr Kwok enquired of the Sherry Netherland whether he might be permitted to transfer beneficial ownership of the Residence to his son through <sup>a</sup> trust, conduct inconsistent and irreconcilable with any contention that such a trust in fact already existed as of 17 February 2015.\n- (ii) The consistent position of Mr Kwok, his witnesses in the NY Proceedings and his counsel was that he was the beneficial owner of the Residence. That position is consistent only with either the Purported DOT being a sham, or Mr Kwok being the sole beneficial owner of Bravo Luck.\n- (iii) The Purported DOT is inconsistent and irreconcilable with the representations made by Mr Kwok to the Sherry Netherland that he was the owner of the Residence, as well as the terms of the Proprietary Lease that Genever NY entered into with the Sherry Netherland.\n- (iv) Mr Kwok is and was the sole legal and beneficial owner of Bravo Luck. The Purported DOT therefore served no purpose other than to obscure and shield his beneficial ownership of Genever BVI and (indirectly) the Residence.\n- (v) In evidence in other proceedings, Mr Kwok has admitted that he holds an interest in other companies through his children. He has reason to do so:\n- (I) He has significant debts;\n- (ii) He is <sup>a</sup> fugitive from justice in the PRC, against whom forfeiture orders have been made in relation to his Hong Kong assets and in respect of whom there are active criminal investigations for conspiracy and money laundering.\n- 35 Alternatively, and for the reasons already set out herein, the Purported DOT was <sup>a</sup> document intended to defraud the creditors of Mr Kwok, and it is therefore liable to be set aside pursuant to Section 81 of the Conveyancing & Law of Property Ordinance.\n- 36 In the premises, each of the Defendants conspired together (and with Genever NY) with the sole or the predominant intention of injuring the Claimant and/or they conspired together to cause loss to the Claimant by unlawful means by creating <sup>a</sup> fraudulent, backdated document, intended to defraud the Claimant as a substantial creditor of Mr Kwok by giving the appearance of having divested himself of his interest in Genever BVI and having transferred that interest to Bravo Luck in circumstances in which:\n\t- (i) The legal and beneficial ownership of Bravo Luck was unknown to the Claimant, and was thought by the Defendants to be incapable of discovery by the Claimant; and\n\t- (ii) Even if the Claimant could discover that Mr Kwok was a shareholder of Bravo Luck, as it ultimately did, the Register of Members was intended to suggest that Mr Kwok was the legal and beneficial owner of only **50%** of the shares issued by Bravo Luck.\n\n# **THE BENEFICIAL OWNERSHIP OF BRAVO LUCK**\n\n- 37 The true position is that Mr Guo is and has always been <sup>a</sup> mere nominee for Mr Kwok and that Mr Kwok owns the whole of the shares issued by Bravo Luck beneficially. In consequence, the shares issued by Bravo Luck are an asset of Mr Kwok available to satisfy the NY Judgment and/or any judgment given in these proceedings. Alternatively, at least **SO%** of those shares are available to satisfy the NY Judgment and/or any judgment given in these proceedings.\n- 38 Until disclosure, the best additional particulars that the Claimant is presently able to provide are that:\n\t- (i) Both in the NY Proceedings and to the Sherry Netherland itself, Mr Kwok has repeatedly asserted that he is the sole beneficial owner of the Residence. Unless that position was dishonest and untrue, it must follow that he is also the sole beneficial owner of Bravo Luck. Mr Kwok's assistant, Ms Wang also provided <sup>a</sup> sworn affidavit in\n\nthose proceedings confirming that Mr Kwok was the beneficial owner of the residence.\n\n- (ii) Upon incorporation, Vistra's client of record was the law firm Stephenson Wong & Co. That is the same law firm that had acted on behalf of Mr Kwok, both is his dealings with PAG and elsewise since at least 2008.\n- (iii) With effect from 19 June 2017, Vistra's client of record changed from Stephenson Wong & Co to William Je of ACA Capital. William Je is <sup>a</sup> longstanding associate of Mr Kwok, as well as a shareholder in Beijing Pangu. Mr Kwok is the subject of an Interpol Red Notice in respect of multiple frauds committed by, inter alia, executives of Beijing Pangu who pled guilty to obtaining loans with fraudulent documents.\n- (iv) The source of the monies paid to acquire the Residence was Mr Kwok (monies which he diverted through Bravo Luck). The Residence is (or was) also the personal home and residence of Mr Kwok.\n- (v) On 4 March 2015 he arranged for Bravo Luck to transfer the sum of US\\$6,300,000 to the Fourth Defendant, who then paid US\\$3,369,000 of that money to the Sherry Netherland. There was no reason for that payment to be made through the Fourth Defendant if (as Mr Kwok now asserts) the Fourth Defendant was in fact the legal and beneficial owner of all of the shares issued by Bravo Luck.\n- (vi) Mr Guo is 33 years of age, and in 2015 he was 28 years of age, with no apparent significant work history or source of independent wealth.\n- 39 In BVIHCM 137/2020 (the **Black Swan Proceedings)** Mr Kwok has produced a document purporting to be an Instrument of Transfer (the **Purported lOT)** which bears the date 12 May 2015 which, if genuine, would effectuate the transfer of Mr Kwok's 50% shareholding in Bravo Luck to the Fourth Defendant. That document:\n\t- (i) Is not genuine and was not signed on the date that it bears;\n\t- (ii) Was not delivered to the Registered Agent of Bravo Luck;\n\t- (iii) Was produced for the first time on 4 September 2020, and was never disclosed in the NY Proceedings despite being (if genuine) responsive to PAX's written document request, among others, demanding disclosure from Mr Kwok of all documents relating to\n\nany transfer of monies or assets with a fair market value in excess of US\\$lm from Kwok to any other person or entity;\n\n- (iv) Was not intended to have legal effect;\n- (v) Alternatively, it was designed to complete the arrangement pleaded herein by which the Fourth Defendant was to hold the shares issued by Bravo Luck on trust for Mr Kwok as his nominee;\n- (vi) If that is not correct, it is <sup>a</sup> document intended to defraud Mr Kwok's creditors which should be set aside.\n- 40 The Defendants are each jointly and severally liable to the Claimant in damages for inducing the several and continuing breaches of contract of Mr Kwok as aforesaid under the 2011 Guarantee and under the various Deeds of Settlement and for conspiring to injure the Claimant as aforesaid.\n\n# **PARTICULARS OF LOSS AND DAMAGE**\n\n- (i) A sum equivalent to the sums due under the 2011 Loan Facility and 2011 Guarantee, exceeding US\\$112.3 million as of the date of this Statement of Claim.\n- (ii) The interest that shall continue to accrue at **15%** per annum upon the amount set forth in the above paragraph, under the terms of the 2011 Loan Facility and 2011 Guarantee.\n- (iii) The costs that the Claimant has incurred (and will incur) in its pursuit of proceedings against Mr Kwok in New York, and in relation to the steps that the Claimant has taken in this Court to protect the fruits of the judgment that it expects to obtain in New York.\n- 41 Furthermore, the Claimant is entitled to a declaration that:\n\t- (i) The Purported DOT (and/or the Purported lOT) is a sham, invalid and of no legal effect; or\n\t- (ii) Alternatively, that both should be set aside as transactions intended to defraud Mr Kwok's creditors pursuant to Section 81 of the Conveyancing & Law of Property Act.\n- 42 Further or alternatively, the Claimant is entitled to damages against each of the Defendants for conspiracy to injure and conspiring to cause loss to the Claimant by unlawful means in the sums already pleaded above.\n\n# **AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS**\n\n- <sup>1</sup> As against Mr Kwok:\n\t- (i) A declaration that any judgment given in the NY Proceedings which is final and for a definite sum of money will be enforceable against Mr Kwok in the BVI at common law; alternatively, the sum claimed under the 2011 Guarantee in the NY Proceedings as a debt; and\n\t- (ii) Following the entry of the NY Judgment, <sup>a</sup> money judgment in respect of the sums due under the NY Judgment, together with interest accruing thereon and costs;\n\t- (iii) The costs of these proceedings on <sup>a</sup> full indemnity basis pursuant to clause 5.3 of the 2011 Guarantee;\n- 2 A declaration that the shares issued by Bravo Luck are held by the Fourth Defendant beneficially for the Third Defendant;\n- <sup>3</sup> A declaration that the shares issued by Genever BVI and by Bravo Luck are assets of Mr Kwok that will be available to satisfy any judgment which the Claimant obtains against him in the proceedings in New York;\n- 4 A declaration that the Purported DOT (and if necessary the Purported TOT) is invalid, void and of no legal effect;\n- 5 Alternatively, an order setting aside the Purported DOT (and if necessary the Purported TOT);\n- 6 Damages for conspiracy;\n- 7 Interest thereon;\n- 8 Such further or other relief as the Court might think fit;\n- 9 Costs.\n\n# **ANDREW WILLINS TERENCE WONG**\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 406-11 Filed 05/20/22 Entered 05/20/22 12:13:10 Page 16 of 441-11 05/25/22 05/26/22 15:59:53\n\n17\n\n#### **CERTIFICATE OF TRUTH**\n\nThe Claimant believes the facts stated in this Statement of Claim to be true. I am a director of the Claimant authorized to sign this statement on the Claimant's behalf.\n\nDated this 25th d,ay of August, 2020 - . ....\n\nFILED BY Andrew Willins of APPLEBY (BVI) Limited, Jayla Place, P0 Box 3190, Road Town, Tortola, British Virgin Islands, VG1110. Legal Practitioner for the Claimant. Ref: AW.432766.0003.\n\nEmail: BVI-Litigation@applebyglobal.com\n\nTHE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT VIRGIN ISLANDS IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE COMMERCIAL DIVISION\n\nClaim No BVI HCM 0137 of 2020\n\n#### BETWEEN\n\nPACIFIC ALLIANCE ASIA OPPORTUNITY FUND LP\n\nClaimant\n\nand\n\nGENEVER HOLDINGS CORP\n\nBRAVO LUCK LIMITED\n\nKWOK HO WAN (also known as MILES KWOK, HO WAN KWOK and GUO WEN GUI)\n\nQIANG GUO (also known as QUO QIANG and MILESON KWOK)\n\nDefendant\n\n#### AMENDED STATEMENT OF CLAIM\n\nAndrew Willins Appleby (BVI) LJmited Legal Practitioner for the Claimant\n\nTel: +1 284 393 5323 Email: awillins@applebyglobal.com\n\nRef: AW. 432766.0003","body_zh":"证据 UCC-11\n\nPacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund LP（太平洋联盟亚洲机会基金有限合伙企业）在 Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund LP v. Genever Holdings Corp. et al, Claim No. BVIHCM 0137 of 2020（Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court, Virgin Islands, Commercial Division（东加勒比最高法院、维尔京群岛、商事庭））一案中于 October 16, 2020 提交的经修订诉讼请求陈述书\n\n22-50073\n\n关于：\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）\n\nUCC　11\n\n5/25/2022 全部准许\nP.E.\n\n案号：BVIHCOM2020/0137 Case 22-50073 Doc 406-11 Filed 05/20/22 Entered 05/20/22 12:13:10 Page 2 of\n441-11 05/25/22 05/26/22 15:59:53\n\n东加勒比最高法院\n\n维尔京群岛\n\n高等法院\n\n商事庭\n\n诉讼编号 BVIHCM 0137 of 2020\n\n原告\nPACIFIC ALLIANCE ASIA OPPORTUNITY FUND LP（太平洋联盟亚洲机会基金有限合伙企业）\n\n诉请人\n\n诉\n\nGEN EVER HOLDINGS CORP（Genever Holdings Corp.）、BRAVO LUCK LIMITED（Bravo Luck Limited）、KWOK HO WAN（又名 MILES KWOK、HO WAN KWOK 和 GUO WEN GUI）、QIANG GUO（又名 QUO QIANG 和 MILESON KWOK）\n\n被告\n\n经修订诉讼请求陈述书\n\n当事人\n\n1. 诉请人（PAX）是一家根据开曼群岛法律组建的豁免有限合伙投资基金。\n\n2. 第一被告（Genever BVI）是一家于 13 February 2015 在英属维尔京群岛注册成立的公司，其注册地址为 Intertrust Corporate Services (BVI) Limited, Ritter House, Wickhams Cay II, Road Town, Tortola, VG1110, British Virgin Islands。\n\n3. 第二被告（Bravo Luck）亦是一家于 2 April 2013 在英属维尔京群岛注册成立的公司，其注册地址为 Vistra (BVI) Limited（Vistra）, Vistra Corporate Services Centre, Wickhams Cay II, Road Town, Tortola, VG1110, British Virgin Islands。\n\n4. 第三被告（Kwok 先生）为逃避中国司法追究者，现居住于美利坚合众国纽约州，逃避中华人民共和国提出的欺诈、贿赂和腐败以及洗钱指控。\n\n提交日期：16/10/2020 10:47\n\n提交备案日期：16/10/2020 10:47\n\n已缴费用：112.91\n\n5. 第四被告是第三被告的 33 岁儿子，出生于 22 February 1987（Guo 先生）。\n\n6. 如下文进一步主张，在所有相关期间：\n\n(i) 第三被告是 Genever BVI 的唯一董事及唯一股东，并且在 26 January 2015 之后持有第四被告所发行股份的 50%；\n\n(ii) 第四被告现为且一直是 Bravo Luck 的唯一（登记）董事，但在所有相关期间，他仅作为其父亲即第三被告的傀儡及名义持有人行事；第三被告在所有相关期间指挥其儿子和 Bravo Luck 的活动；以及\n\n(iii) 因此，第三被告亦担任 Bravo Luck 的事实董事或影子董事，第三被告的行为和知情情况应归属于 Genever BVI 和 Bravo Luck，而第四被告的行为和知情情况应归属于 Bravo Luck。\n\nKWOK 对 PAX 的责任\n\n7. 于或约于 4 February 2008，Spirit Charter Investment Limited（Spirit Charter）与 PAX 签订了一项贷款融资协议（2008 Loan Facility）。PAX 根据 2008 Loan Facility 向 Spirit Charter 提供的贷款本金金额为 US\\$30 million。此外，Kwok 先生按照 2008 Loan Facility 的要求，就 Spirit Charter 对 PAX 的偿还义务签署了个人担保（2008 Guarantee）。2008 Loan Facility 的条款于 12 March 2008 修订（经修订 2008 Loan Facility）。\n\n8. 根据日期为 17 September 2009 的和解契据（2009 Deed of Settlement），由 Kwok 先生控制的公司 Shiny Times Limited（Shiny Times）承接了 Spirit Charter 在经修订 2008 Loan Facility 项下对 PAX 的债务。截至 2009 Deed of Settlement 日期，经修订 2008 Loan Facility 项下包括未付利息在内的未偿金额，经各方同意为 US\\$45,357,534.25。\n\n9. 于 18 November 2009，按照 2009 Deed of Settlement 的要求，Kwok 先生接受了一项新担保（2009 Guarantee）的条款，据此，他再次确认其对经修订 2008 Loan Facility 条款项下 Shiny Times 承接的对 PAX 偿还义务的担保。\n\n10. 于或约于 12 March 2010，Shiny Times、PAX 和 Kwok 先生签订了一项修订后的贷款融资协议，约定将债务偿还日期从 12 March 2010 延长至 31 December 2010（2010 Loan Facility）；Kwok 先生继续根据 2009 Guarantee 对该债务提供担保。截至 2010 Loan Facility 日期，该债务经各方同意为 US\\$47,625,410.96。\n\n11. 由于未能偿还 2010 Loan Facility，且 Kwok 先生未履行其个人担保，各方于 16 March 2011 签订了一项新的贷款融资协议（2011 Loan Facility），其取代并替换了各方此前有关对 PAX 未偿债务的协议。截至 16 March 2011，经修订 2008 Loan Facility 项下应付给 PAX 的包括未付利息在内的未偿金额，经各方同意为 US\\$46,426,489。该债务应于 30 June 2012 前偿还，但 Kwok 先生再次未能偿还。\n\n12. 同样于 16 March 2011，Kwok 先生接受了第三项担保（2011 Guarantee）的条款，据此，他就经 2011 Loan Facility 修订的条款项下 Shiny Times 对 PAX 的责任提供个人担保。截至本诉讼请求陈述书日期，Kwok 先生在 2011 Guarantee 项下的责任超过 US\\$112.3 million（不包括合同执行费用）。\n\n13. 就相关部分而言，根据 2011 Guarantee 第 2.1 条，Kwok 先生不可撤销且无条件地：\n\n(i) 保证义务（定义见该担保书）的适当及按时支付，并同意在收到催告后立即向 PAX 支付所有到期但未支付的义务。\n\n(ii) 同意支付自 31 December 2010 起至所有该等责任全部付清之日止按年利率 15% 累计的利息。\n\n14. 根据 2011 Guarantee 第 5.3 条，Kwok 先生还同意就 PAX 因行使或执行其根据该担保书或法律所享有的任何权利或权力而可能产生的所有及任何成本、损失、费用（包括律师费）和义务，对 PAX 作出赔偿并使其完全免受损害。\n\n15. 已于 16 October 2015 向 Kwok 先生催告支付其项下义务，但该催告未获履行。\n\n16. 违反其在 2011 Guarantee 项下的义务，作为保证人的 Kwok、作为主债务人的 Shiny Times（以及任何代表其二者行事的人）均未清偿 2011 Guarantee 所担保的债务或其任何部分。\n\n和解契据\n\n17. 于 25 April 2012，在 Shiny Times 未能履行 2011 Loan Facility 后，Shiny Times 和 PAX 签订了一项和解协议，Kwok 先生控制的另一实体 Beijing Pangu Investment Company Limited（Beijing Pangu）亦为该协议当事方（2012 Deed of Settlement）。2012 Deed of Settlement 的各方同意并在其中载明，截至 25 April 2012，应付给 PAX 的包括利息在内的总额为 US\\$52 million。2012 Deed of Settlement 规定，在满足以下条件后，应付给 PAX 的金额不再到期或应付：\n\n(a) Shiny Times 向 PAX 支付三期分期付款，每期金额为 US\\$17,333,333；其后\n\n(b) PAX 完成购买位于中华人民共和国（PRC）北京盘古广场、由 Beijing Pangu 所有的三套公寓（盘古公寓）；以及\n\n(c) PAX 以人民币向 Beijing Pangu 支付盘古公寓的购买价款。\n\n18. Shiny Times 未按 2012 Deed of Settlement 的要求支付任何一期三期分期付款。于 19 April 2013，Shiny Times、Beijing Pangu 和 PAX 签订了一项修订后的和解协议（2013 Deed of Settlement）。2013 Deed of Settlement 的各方同意，截至 19 April 2013，应付给 PAX 的包括利息在内的总额为 US\\$52 million。2013 Deed of Settlement 还规定，在满足下列经修订要求后，应付给 PAX 的金额不再到期或应付：\n\n(a) PAX 首先完成购买盘古公寓。该等购买应以三项独立交易进行，每项交易的购买价款约为 US\\$5 million；其后\n\n(b) 在每套盘古公寓购买完成后，Shiny Times 向 PAX 支付三期每期约 US\\$5 million 的分期付款。\n\n19. 然而，在第 18(a) 和 18(b) 段规定的交易进行之前，Shiny Times 和 Beijing Pangu 须满足若干其他先决条件，该等条件涉及包括抵押、税务以及最终产权转让等事项，均为中华人民共和国房地产交易中的标准要求（先决条件）。2013 Deed of Settlement 规定，该等先决条件应于 31 July 2013 前完成；否则，2013 Deed of Settlement 将终止，2011 Loan Facility 和 2011 Guarantee 的条款将恢复完全效力。\n\n20. Shiny Times 和 Beijing Pangu 未能于 31 July 2013 前满足先决条件，并通过日期为 3 December 2013、15 May 2014 和 11 July 2014 的补充契据获授一系列期限延长。\n\n除 Beijing Pangu 和 Kwok 先生的履行期限外，各补充契据均与 2013 Deed of Settlement 具有相同条款（补充和解契据）。\n\n21. 于 10 February 2015，Shiny Times、Beijing Pangu 和 PAX 签订最后一份补充和解契据（最终和解契据），给予 Kwok 先生和 Beijing Pangu 进一步延期至 30 June 2015 以履行先决条件。违反最终和解契据，Kwok 先生和 Beijing Pangu 未能于 June 2015 结束前履行先决条件。\n\n（2012 Deed of Settlement、2013 Deed of Settlement、补充和解契据和最终和解契据，合称和解契据。）\n\n22. 第 7 至 21 段所列全部协议均受香港特别行政区法律管辖。\n\n纽约诉讼程序\n\n23. 诉请人于 18 April 2017 向 Supreme Court of the State of New York（纽约州最高法院）（纽约法院）提交起诉状，对 Kwok 先生提起诉讼。在该等诉讼程序中（纽约诉讼程序），就相关部分而言：\n\n(a) 诉请人：\n\n(i) 已向 Kwok 先生主张 Second Kwok Guarantee 项下到期款项，提交时总额为 US\\$88 million（现为 US\\$112.3 million，另加按年利率 15% 持续累计的合同利息，不包括合同执行费用）。\n\n(H) 已对 Kwok 先生提交中间动议，请求作出判决前扣押令，以扣押由 Genever NY 持有的一项有价值资产（纽约曼哈顿一处住宅物业的租赁权）；Genever NY 继而由 Genever BVI 所有，最终受益所有人为 Kwok 先生。该动议提出的依据是，应当揭开该等实体的公司面纱，并将其视为 Kwok 先生的资产，以供执行第 23(a)(i) 段所述实体请求中的判决；\n\n(b) Kwok 先生：\n\n(i) 最初以法院地和管辖权理由对该等诉讼程序提出抗辩。其管辖权抗辩最终由 Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department（最高法院上诉庭第一部门）于 5 April 2018 作出的裁决中判定诉请人胜诉。\n\n(ii) 此后，其以虚假声称其已实质履行《2013年和解契据》为由，辩称其已清偿根据《2011年融资协议》和《2011年保证书》到期应付的债务。\n\n(iii) 尽管有第23(b)(ii)段所述情形，其最近却完全改变立场，并不诚实地提出虚假且不真诚的指称，称该诉讼中所依赖的各项合同，包括《2011年融资协议》、《2011年保证书》及各份《和解契据》，均非其实际签署的文件，甚至称该等文件系其香港律师与中华人民共和国政府共谋伪造。\n\n24 2020年9月15日，NY Court（纽约法院）在该等诉讼中作出有利于原告的判决，金额待评定。一旦该金额由纽约法院确定，原告将获得一项就确定金额作出的终局判决，可依普通法在英属维尔京群岛执行（下称“纽约判决”）。\n\n25 因此，原告预计将在NY Proceedings（纽约诉讼）中成为Mr Kwok（郭文贵先生）、Genever BVI（Genever英属维尔京群岛公司）及Genever NY（Genever纽约公司）的判决债权人，金额巨大，目前超过$112.3m，连同按年利率15%累积的利息，以及合同约定的执行费用。原告将同意暂停本诉讼，或至少暂停对其损害赔偿请求金额的确定，直至纽约法院确定纽约判决项下应付金额。\n\n26 尽管郭先生曾就其财力向Sherry Netherland（雪莉-荷兰人公寓）作出下文所述陈述，郭先生在纽约诉讼中主张，其“事实上，依法并不拥有美国境内的任何资产”，且其“身无分文”。因此，预计其不会遵守纽约判决或本院作出的任何判决。\n\n共谋\n\n27 郭先生根据《2011年保证书》对原告承担的责任（以及其根据预计作出的纽约判决承担的责任）目前超过USD$112,300,000，不包括合同约定的执行费用。\n\n28 郭先生并未履行其根据《2011年保证书》承担的义务，而是依照被告之间策划的安排，将约US$68m转移给Bravo Luck（博裕），该金额亦约为当时郭先生欠PAX（PAX公司）的总额，以便将该笔资金隐匿于涉及Genever英属维尔京群岛公司的不透明架构中，使郭先生能够持续违反其对PAX承担的合同义务，同时利用当时到期应付PAX的同一笔资金购买纽约市的一套豪华公寓，并最终规避纽约诉讼中判决的执行。\n\n29 在披露后原告方才知悉的某一日期，郭先生安排将其约US$70m资产支付至Bravo Luck在UBS AG（瑞银集团）开立的账户（下称“UBS账户”）。其依照下文所述非法共谋作出该等安排，意图欺诈其债权人，从而以非法手段使原告蒙受损失。\n\n30 此外，在本案披露后原告方才知悉、但在2015年2月之后的若干日期：\n\n(i) 第一、第二及第四被告诱使、鼓励并协助郭先生多次违反其对PAX承担的合同义务；以及\n\n(ii) 所有被告均以损害原告和/或使原告蒙受损失为唯一或主要意图，共同不法共谋，以协助郭先生逃避其根据《2011年保证书》承担的责任，和/或试图使其自身免于判决执行，和/或以非法手段使原告蒙受损失。\n\n31 原告保留在披露后进一步主张被告共谋事实的权利。在此之前，原告能够就该共谋提供的最佳具体事项如下：\n\n共谋的具体事项\n\n(i) Genever BVI于2015年2月13日应郭先生要求成立，作为持有一家在纽约注册成立的公司Genever Holdings, LLC（Genever NY）的股份的载体。同日，Genever BVI向其唯一股东郭先生配发1,000股股份。\n\n(ii) 就PAX所知，设立Genever BVI以持有Genever NY的股份并无明显优势；设立Genever BVI的唯一或主要目的，是使Genever NY的实益所有权，进而使住宅物业（定义见下文）的实益所有权得以隐匿及遮蔽。\n\n(iii) 2015年2月17日，Genever NY应郭先生要求在纽约州注册成立。同日或前后，Genever NY根据日期为2015年2月13日的《有限公司协议》，将其全部股份配发给Genever BVI。\n\n(iv) 据称亦于同日，即2015年2月17日，Genever BVI（通过郭先生行事）与Genever NY据称签署了一份《信托声明》（下称“据称信托声明”）。根据据称信托声明的条款：\n\n(I) Genever NY据称为一家特殊目的载体，持有位于纽约第五大道781号Sherry-Netherland Apartments（雪莉-荷兰人公寓）的第18层物业（1801、1804、1807、1809、1811单元）（下称“住宅物业”）。\n\n(ii) Genever BVI据称为一家持有Genever NY的特殊目的载体。\n\n(iii) 据称，郭先生已告知Bravo Luck，“某些[身份不明且未披露的]第三方可能共同拥有”Genever NY发行的股份和/或住宅物业。\n\n(iv) 据称，郭先生已声明其为Bravo Luck以信托方式持有Genever BVI发行的股份。\n\n(v) 2015年1月26日，Mr Guo（郭先生）促使Bravo Luck向郭先生配发1股股份，由此Bravo Luck的登记股东为郭先生与郭先生，各持相等股份。\n\n(vi) 在原告目前尚不知悉的某一日期，郭先生促使或安排资金转入Bravo Luck在UBS AG Hong Kong（瑞银集团香港）开立的银行账户（下称“UBS账户”）。\n\n(vii) 2015年3月4日，郭先生在诱使Bravo Luck及郭先生允许其单方面授权从Bravo Luck的UBS账户付款后，安排Bravo Luck向Sherry-Netherland的律师Ivey Barnum and O'Mara LLC（艾维·巴纳姆和奥马拉有限责任公司）转账US$62,990,781.85，以Genever NY名义购置住宅物业。\n\n(viii) 2015年3月5日，另有US$6.3m从UBS账户转账给郭先生，据称供其“自身开支”使用。在没有解释的情况下，该金额的一部分很可能是为补偿郭先生参与该安排而向其作出的付款。\n\n(ix) 2015年3月5日，郭先生向Sherry Netherland交付了一张金额为US$3,369,000的银行本票，该款项由从UBS账户转给其的资金支付。该付款经由郭先生转付，旨在使郭先生能够隐瞒其对Genever BVI、Bravo Luck和/或住宅物业的实益所有权。\n\n32 被告采取该等步骤，尽管：\n\n(i) 郭先生于2011年3月16日根据《2011年贷款融资协议》和《2011年保证书》的条款承担向原告支付US$46.2 Million的义务，该债务于2015年2月已增至超过US$67m，并继续按年利率15 percent累积利息。\n\n(ii) 2013年4月19日，Pangu（盘古）根据《2013年和解契据》的条款承担履行先决条件并于2013年7月31日前将盘古公寓的产权转让给PAX的义务，以清偿《2011年贷款融资协议》和《第二保证书》项下债务。三个月前，即2013年1月17日，郭先生已成为Bravo Luck的股东。\n\n(iii) 2015年2月10日，郭先生签署《最终和解契据》，意图为推进及完成上述共谋争取时间，其完全知悉，在中华人民共和国当局于2015年2月2日或前后扣押其资产（包括北京盘古）后，其最终将无法履行该契据。《最终和解契据》签署后仅数日内，即2015年2月13日及2015年2月17日，Genever NY和Genever BVI即告成立。\n\n(iv) 根据《最终和解契据》的条款，郭先生获准将履行先决条件及向PAX转让盘古公寓产权的期限延至2015年6月30日，使郭先生能够使用其当时欠付PAX的约同一金额资金，于2015年3月6日完成住宅物业的购买。\n\n据称信托声明\n\n33 据称信托声明是一项欺诈，并非于其所载日期签署。在不影响本起诉状中所述其他事项的前提下：\n\n(i) Genever NY于2015年3月6日购得住宅物业，但在据称信托声明中将其营业地址列为由住宅物业代收，尽管据称信托声明据称于近三周前的2015年2月17日签署。\n\n(ii) 据称信托声明的措辞亦表明，Genever NY在其据称签署时已拥有住宅物业。该陈述显然不实：住宅物业直至约三周后的2015年3月6日才实际购得。事实上，截至2015年2月17日，郭先生甚至尚未申请购买住宅物业；其首次申请是在2015年2月26日。\n\n(iii) 尽管据称信托声明如属真实，本应回应PAX的书面文件请求，但其直至2019年4月22日才在纽约诉讼中提交（即与扣押相关的文件开示结束数月后）。在此之前，郭先生、Genever BVI及Genever NY在纽约诉讼中的一贯立场是郭先生为住宅物业的实益所有人；即使据称信托声明已被披露，该等主体仍维持该立场。\n\n34 此外，据称信托声明是一项虚假安排，其目的并非在Bravo Luck与其任何当事方之间产生法律效力，而是仅为向郭先生的债权人隐匿其资产而设计。除上述事项外，在等待披露期间，原告将依赖以下补充事项：\n\n具体事项\n\n（i）在所谓的 DOT 据称签署一年多后，自 29 June 2016 起及其后，Kwok先生（郭文贵）向 Sherry Netherland（谢里·内瑟兰）询问，是否可获准通过信托将该住宅的实益所有权转让给其儿子；此等行为与任何主张该信托事实上于 17 February 2015 已存在的说法均不一致且不可调和。\n\n（ii）Kwok先生、其在 NY Proceedings（纽约诉讼）中的证人及其律师始终持有的立场是，其为该住宅的实益所有人。该立场仅与以下两种情形之一相一致：所谓的 DOT 是虚假安排，或 Kwok先生是 Bravo Luck（布拉沃·勒克）的唯一实益所有人。\n\n（iii）所谓的 DOT 与 Kwok先生向 Sherry Netherland 所作其为该住宅所有人的陈述，以及 Genever NY（吉尼弗纽约）与 Sherry Netherland 签订的 Proprietary Lease（专有租约）的条款，均不一致且不可调和。\n\n（iv）Kwok先生现时及一直以来均为 Bravo Luck 的唯一法定及实益所有人。因此，所谓的 DOT 除了掩饰并遮蔽其对 Genever BVI（吉尼弗英属维尔京群岛）及（间接地）该住宅的实益所有权外，别无其他目的。\n\n（v）在其他程序中作为证据时，Kwok先生已承认其通过子女持有其他公司的权益。其有理由如此行事：\n\n（I）其负有巨额债务；\n\n（ii）其为在 PRC（中华人民共和国）逃避司法追究的逃犯，就其香港资产已作出没收命令，并且其正因共谋及洗钱而受到积极进行中的刑事调查。\n\n35　或者，且基于上文已列明的理由，所谓的 DOT 是一份意图欺诈 Kwok先生债权人的文件，故应根据 Conveyancing & Law of Property Ordinance（《物业转易及财产条例》）第81条予以撤销。\n\n36　据此，各被告共同（并与 Genever NY）共谋，其唯一或主要意图是损害原告，及／或其共同共谋以非法手段使原告遭受损失，方法是制作一份具有追溯日期的欺诈性文件，意图通过造成 Kwok先生已处分其在 Genever BVI 中的权益并将该权益转让给 Bravo Luck 的表象，以欺诈作为 Kwok先生重大债权人的原告；而在该等情形下：\n\n（i）原告并不知悉 Bravo Luck 的法定及实益所有权情况，且被告认为原告无法发现该等情况；及\n\n（ii）即使原告能够发现 Kwok先生是 Bravo Luck 的股东，正如其最终所发现的那样，股东名册意图显示 Kwok先生仅为 Bravo Luck 已发行股份中 50% 的法定及实益所有人。\n\nBRAVO LUCK 的实益所有权\n\n37　真实情况是，Guo先生（郭强）现时及一直以来仅为 Kwok先生的代名人，而 Kwok先生实益拥有 Bravo Luck 已发行的全部股份。因此，Bravo Luck 已发行的股份是 Kwok先生可用以清偿 NY Judgment（纽约判决书）及／或本程序中作出的任何判决书的资产。或者，该等股份中至少 50% 可用以清偿 NY Judgment 及／或本程序中作出的任何判决书。\n\n38　在披露前，原告目前能够提供的最佳进一步细节如下：\n\n（i）Kwok先生在 NY Proceedings 中及向 Sherry Netherland 本身，均一再声称其为该住宅的唯一实益所有人。除非该立场不诚实且不真实，否则必然意味着其亦为 Bravo Luck 的唯一实益所有人。Kwok先生的助理 Wang女士（王女士）亦在该等程序中提供经宣誓的宣誓书，确认 Kwok先生是该住宅的实益所有人。\n\n（ii）在成立时，Vistra（维思达）的登记客户为 Stephenson Wong & Co（史蒂芬森·黄律师事务所）。该律师事务所自至少 2008 年以来，一直代表 Kwok先生处理其与 PAG（太盟投资集团）的交易及其他事务。\n\n（iii）自 19 June 2017 起，Vistra 的登记客户由 Stephenson Wong & Co 变更为 ACA Capital（ACA资本）的 William Je（威廉·杰）。William Je 是 Kwok先生的长期关联人士，亦是 Beijing Pangu（北京盘古）的股东。Kwok先生因包括 Beijing Pangu 的高管在内的人士实施的多项欺诈行为而成为 Interpol Red Notice（国际刑警组织红色通报）的对象；该等高管已就使用欺诈文件取得贷款而认罪答辩。\n\n（iv）用于购置该住宅的款项来源于 Kwok先生（其将该等款项经由 Bravo Luck 转移）。该住宅亦是（或曾是）Kwok先生的个人住所及居所。\n\n（v）于 4 March 2015，其安排 Bravo Luck 向第四被告转让 US$6,300,000，第四被告随后从该笔款项中向 Sherry Netherland 支付 US$3,369,000。若（如 Kwok先生现时所主张）第四被告事实上为 Bravo Luck 已发行全部股份的法定及实益所有人，则没有理由经由第四被告作出该笔付款。\n\n（vi）Guo先生现年 33 岁，而其于 2015 年为 28 岁，并无显著的工作经历或独立财富来源。\n\n39　在 BVIHCM 137/2020（Black Swan Proceedings（黑天鹅程序））中，Kwok先生出示了一份声称为 Instrument of Transfer（转让文书）（所谓的 IOT）的文件，日期为 12 May 2015；如属真实，该文件将使 Kwok先生在 Bravo Luck 所持 50% 股权转让给第四被告。该文件：\n\n（i）并不真实，且并非于其所载日期签署；\n\n（ii）并未交付给 Bravo Luck 的注册代理人；\n\n（iii）首次于 4 September 2020 出示，且尽管该文件（如属真实）应当回应 PAX（太平洋联盟亚洲机会基金）的书面文件请求等请求，要求 Kwok先生披露其向任何其他人士或实体转让任何公平市场价值超过 US$1m 的款项或资产的一切文件，但该文件从未在 NY Proceedings 中披露；\n\n（iv）并非意图产生法律效力；\n\n（v）或者，该文件旨在完成本文件所述安排，即第四被告作为 Kwok先生的代名人，为 Kwok先生以信托方式持有 Bravo Luck 已发行的股份；\n\n（vi）如上述说法不正确，则该文件意图欺诈 Kwok先生的债权人，且应予撤销。\n\n40　各被告均应就其促使 Kwok先生如上所述违反 2011 Guarantee（2011年保证书）及各份 Deeds of Settlement（和解契据）的数项持续违约行为，以及如上所述共谋损害原告的行为，向原告承担连带损害赔偿责任。\n\n损失及损害赔偿的细节\n\n（i）相当于 2011 Loan Facility（2011年贷款融资）及 2011 Guarantee 项下到期款项的金额，截至本起诉状之日超过 US$112.3 million。\n\n（ii）根据 2011 Loan Facility 及 2011 Guarantee 的条款，就上段所列金额将继续按年利率 15% 累积的利息。\n\n（iii）原告在纽约追诉 Kwok先生的程序中已经产生（并将产生）的费用，以及原告为保护其预期将在纽约获得的判决书成果而在本院采取的步骤所产生的费用。\n\n41　此外，原告有权获得以下宣告：\n\n（i）所谓的 DOT（及／或所谓的 IOT）为虚假安排、无效且不具法律效力；或\n\n（ii）或者，根据 Conveyancing & Law of Property Act（《物业转易及财产法》）第81条，两者均应作为意图欺诈 Kwok先生债权人的交易予以撤销。\n\n42　进一步或作为替代，原告有权就各被告共谋损害原告及共谋以非法手段使原告遭受损失，向各被告请求上文已主张金额的损害赔偿。\n\n因此，原告请求\n\n1　针对 Kwok先生：\n\n（i）宣告 NY Proceedings 中作出的任何终局且金额确定的判决书，将可依据普通法在 BVI（英属维尔京群岛）对 Kwok先生强制执行；或者，请求 NY Proceedings 中 2011 Guarantee 项下所主张的债务金额；及\n\n（ii）在 NY Judgment 登记后，就 NY Judgment 项下到期款项作出金钱判决书，并连同其上累积的利息及费用；\n\n（iii）根据 2011 Guarantee 第5.3条，按完全赔偿基准支付本程序的费用；\n\n2　宣告 Bravo Luck 已发行的股份由第四被告为第三被告实益持有；\n\n3　宣告 Genever BVI 及 Bravo Luck 已发行的股份为 Kwok先生的资产，可用于清偿原告在纽约程序中对其获得的任何判决书；\n\n4　宣告所谓的 DOT（以及如有必要，所谓的 IOT）无效、作废且不具法律效力；\n\n5　或者，作出撤销所谓的 DOT（以及如有必要，所谓的 IOT）的命令；\n\n6　就共谋作出的损害赔偿；\n\n7　其上的利息；\n\n8　本院认为适当的进一步或其他救济；\n\n9　费用。\n\nANDREW WILLINS TERENCE WONG（安德鲁·威林斯·特伦斯·黄）\n\n案件 22-50073　文件 406-11　提交日期 05/20/22　录入日期 05/20/22 12:13:10　第 16 页，共 441-11 页　05/25/22　05/26/22　15:59:53\n\n真实性证明书\n\n原告相信本起诉状中所陈述的事实真实无误。我是原告的一名董事，获授权代表原告签署本声明。\n\n日期：2020 年 August 25th 日。\n\n由 APPLEBY (BVI) Limited（艾伯利〔英属维尔京群岛〕有限公司）的 Andrew Willins（安德鲁·威林斯）提交，地址：Jayla Place, P0 Box 3190, Road Town, Tortola, British Virgin Islands, VG1110。原告的法律执业者。档案编号：AW.432766.0003。\n\n电子邮箱：BVI-Litigation@applebyglobal.com\n\nTHE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT VIRGIN ISLANDS IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE COMMERCIAL DIVISION（东加勒比最高法院维尔京群岛高等法院商事庭）\n\n诉讼编号 BVI HCM 0137 of 2020\n\n当事人如下\n\nPACIFIC ALLIANCE ASIA OPPORTUNITY FUND LP（太平洋联盟亚洲机会基金有限合伙企业）\n\n原告\n\n及\n\nGENEVER HOLDINGS CORP（吉尼弗控股公司）\n\nBRAVO LUCK LIMITED（布拉沃·勒克有限公司）\n\nKWOK HO WAN（郭文贵），又名 MILES KWOK、HO WAN KWOK 及 GUO WEN GUI\n\nQIANG GUO（郭强），又名 QUO QIANG 及 MILESON KWOK\n\n被告\n\n修订起诉状\n\nAndrew Willins（安德鲁·威林斯）\nAppleby (BVI) Limited（艾伯利〔英属维尔京群岛〕有限公司）\n原告的法律执业者\n\n电话：+1 284 393 5323　电子邮箱：awillins@applebyglobal.com\n\n档案编号：AW. 432766.0003","key_entities":["Kwok","Guo","Ho Wan Kwok","Je","CIPA","William Je","forfeiture"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":406,"court":"CTB"}],"word_count":5621,"status":"published","published_at":"2022-05-20 00:00:00","created_at":"2022-05-20","updated_at":"2026-08-23 18:51:32"}