{"id":"court_ctb_846_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":846,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"ORDER","filed_date":null,"title":"UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION | -------------------------------------------","summary_zh":null,"summary_en":null,"body_en":"## **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION**\n\n| ------------------------------------------------------ | x           |                         |\n|--------------------------------------------------------|-------------|-------------------------|\n| In re:                                                 | :<br>:      | Chapter 11              |\n| HO WAN KWOK,                                           | :<br>:<br>: | Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) |\n| Debtor.                                                | :<br>:      |                         |\n| ------------------------------------------------------ | x           |                         |\n\n# **NOTICE OF SUBMISSION OF FURTHER REVISED PROPOSED ORDER ON MOTION FOR ORDER (A) PROVIDING THAT CONTROL OF ANY ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE, WORK PRODUCT PROTECTION, AND OTHER PRIVILEGES RELATED TO RULE 2004 SUBPOENAED DOCUMENTS PASSED TO TRUSTEE UPON APPOINTMENT, (B) DIRECTING THAT DEBTOR AND OTHER EXAMINEES NOT WITHHOLD DOCUMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF SUCH PRIVILEGES, AND (C) GRANTING RELATED RELIEF**\n\nLuc A. Despins, in his capacity as the chapter 11 trustee (the \"Trustee\") appointed in the chapter 11 case of Ho Wan Kwok (the \"Debtor\"), hereby files this notice of submission of a further revised proposed order in support of his motion [ECF No. 777] (the \"Motion\") for an order (a) confirming that the Trustee owns and controls the attorney-client privilege, work product protection and other privileges on issues related to the Debtor's assets and financial affairs and the administration of his estate, (b) directing that the Discovery Recipients not withhold documents from the Trustee on account of any such privileges in responding to the Rule 2004 Subpoenas,1 or attempt to assert any such privileges that are properly owned by the Trustee and (c) granting related relief.\n\n<sup>1</sup> Capitalized terms not defined herein have the meanings given to them in the Motion.\n\nFollowing the continued hearing on the Motion that occurred on September 6, 2022, the Trustee has endeavored to further meet and confer with the Debtor concerning a potential consensual resolution of the Motion. To that end, the Trustee has prepared a further revised proposed order (the \"Further Revised Trustee Proposed Order\"), attached hereto as Exhibit A (clean) and Exhibit B (blackline to Trustee's prior proposed order appearing at ECF 823), containing two new paragraphs designed to address certain concerns the Debtor has raised regarding the relief sought by the Motion. Specifically, the Trustee has inserted (i) a paragraph setting forth a procedure that would allow the Debtor, under certain circumstances, to seek a further ruling from the Court as to privileges governing particular documents or information that could result in personal harm to the Debtor if disclosed to the Trustee, and (ii) a paragraph indicating that the Trustee's control over the Debtor's privileges will entitle the Trustee to access and otherwise use privileged documents and information but will not permit the Trustee to waive any privileges absent further order of the Court.\n\nSpecifically, the two new paragraphs added to the Further Revised Trustee Proposed Order are the following:\n\n> 7. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, to the extent the Debtor believes in good faith that particular documents or information that are covered by a Trustee Privilege and that concern the Investigation Topics could result in personal harm to the Debtor if disclosed to the Trustee, then (i) the Debtor or his counsel, as applicable, shall, by the applicable production deadline, log all such documents in accordance with the requirements of D. Conn. L. Civ. R. 26(e) and/or identify all such non-documentary information in a manner necessary to support the claim of privilege, including with sufficient information to identify the basis for asserting the potential for personal harm,2 and (ii) either party\n\n<sup>2</sup> Consistent with applicable discovery rules, the Debtor may withhold from production (using appropriate redactions as necessary) only that portion of such document or information that is subject to the Debtor's claim of privilege and good-faith belief regarding personal harm; all other portions of such document or information must be produced to the Trustee.\n\nmay file a motion with the Court to have the question of control of the privilege over any logged documents or other information decided on an expedited basis, and the Debtor may request that the Court, in making such decision, undertake a further balancing analysis in accordance with applicable case law. For purposes of this paragraph, \"expedited basis\" shall require a response to any motion within four days, and any reply within two days thereafter; the Court shall then either rule on the papers or hold a hearing on the motion at its earliest convenience. The Court may as part of its consideration of any such motion require the production of logged documents and information to the Court for *in camera* inspection. For the avoidance of doubt, the possibility that the disclosure of the documents or information in question could result in the Trustee identifying potential assets of the estate, or could constitute evidence relating to the ownership or control of assets by the Debtor, shall not constitute \"personal harm to the Debtor\" sufficient for the Debtor to withhold documents or information pursuant to this paragraph, regardless of any position or opinion of the Debtor regarding the ownership or control of such assets.\n\n8. For purposes of this order only, the term \"control\" as used herein with respect to any Trustee Privilege shall mean that the Trustee is able to review, access, and otherwise use all documents and information subject to such privilege in carrying out his duties and responsibilities in this case, including without limitation in prosecuting actions to recover property of the estate; provided, however, the Trustee shall not be entitled to waive any Trustee Privilege (for example, by disclosing privileged documents or information on the public docket of this case or by sharing such documents or information with a third party) absent further order of the Court, and all filings by the Trustee containing or describing documents or information covered by a Trustee Privilege shall be filed under seal. The parties reserve all their respective rights as to any future request by the Trustee to waive a Trustee Privilege. Any such request to waive a Trustee Privilege may be made by motion on an expedited basis in accordance with the procedures described in paragraph 7.\n\nThe Trustee shared this language for the revised proposed order with counsel for the\n\nDebtor yesterday afternoon, but the Debtor has not yet responded as to whether the revisions resolve his objection to the Motion. Regardless of the Debtor's position, however, the Trustee consents to the Further Revised Trustee Proposed Order and requests that it be entered by the\n\nCourt. To the extent the Debtor is able to advise the Court prior to the continued hearing on September 12, 2022 that the revisions to the order resolve his objections, then the Further Revised Trustee Proposed Order can be entered on consent. If not, the Trustee requests that it be entered over any remaining objections asserted by the Debtor.\n\nIn addition to the new paragraphs 7 and 8 described above, the Trustee has also added language to the Further Revised Trustee Proposed Order indicating that he does not take issue with the Debtor's position that nothing in the order is intended to affect the Debtor's rights regarding privilege under the laws of the United Kingdom in the litigation styled *Kwok Ho Wan v. UBS AG*, Claim No. CL-2020-000345 (High Court of Justice Business and Property Courts of England and Wales Commercial Court), which is subject to a separate order of this Court. 3\n\nDated: September 9, 2022 LUC A. DESPINS, New Haven, Connecticut CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE\n\nBy: */s/ Patrick R. Linsey*\n\nPatrick R. Linsey (ct29437) NEUBERT, PEPE & MONTEITH, P.C. 195 Church Street, 13th Floor New Haven, Connecticut 06510 (203) 781-2847 plinsey@npmlaw.com\n\n*and*\n\nNicholas A. Bassett *(pro hac vice* pending) PAUL HASTINGS LLP 2050 M Street NW Washington, D.C., 20036 (202) 551-1902 nicholasbassett@paulhastings.com\n\n<sup>3</sup> For the avoidance of doubt, *the revisions to the Further Revised Trustee Proposed Order do not address all of the issues existing between the Trustee's prior proposed order [ECF 823] and the Debtor's proposed order [ECF 824]*. Such issues are described in the Trustee's supplemental submission dated September 7, 2022 [ECF 835], and, except to the extent addressed by the Further Revised Trustee Proposed Order, they remain outstanding.\n\n *and*\n\nAvram E. Luft *(pro hac vice* pending) Douglass Barron (*pro hac vice* pending) PAUL HASTINGS LLP 200 Park Avenue New York, New York 10166 (212) 318-6079 aviluft@paulhastings.com\n\n*Counsel for the Chapter 11 Trustee*\n\n# Exhibit A\n\n## **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION**\n\n| ------------------------------------------------------ | x           |                         |\n|--------------------------------------------------------|-------------|-------------------------|\n| In re:                                                 | :<br>:      | Chapter 11              |\n| HO WAN KWOK,                                           | :<br>:<br>: | Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) |\n| Debtor.                                                | :<br>:      |                         |\n| ------------------------------------------------------ | x           |                         |\n\n# **ORDER REGARDING CONTROL OF ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE, WORK PRODUCT PROTECTION, AND OTHER PRIVILEGES RELATED TO RULE 2004 SUBPOENAED DOCUMENTS AND INFORMATION**\n\nUpon the motion (the \"Motion\") of Mr. Luc A. Despins, in his capacity as the chapter 11 trustee (the \"Trustee\") appointed in the chapter 11 case of Ho Wan Kwok (the \"Debtor\"), for the entry of an order (this \"Order\"), pursuant to sections 323, 521, 541, and 1108 of title 11 of the United States Code (the \"Bankruptcy Code\"), rule 2004 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure (the \"Bankruptcy Rules\"), and the Court's orders granting the Trustee's motions for examination pursuant to Rule 2004, (a) confirming that the Trustee owns and controls the attorney-client privilege, work product protection and other privileges on issues related to the Debtor's assets and financial affairs and the administration of his estate, (b) directing that the Discovery Recipients not withhold documents from the Trustee on account of any such privileges in responding to the Rule 2004 Subpoenas,<sup>1</sup> or attempt to assert any such privileges that are properly owned by the Trustee and (c) granting related relief, all as more fully set forth in the Motion; and this Court having jurisdiction to consider the Motion and the relief requested\n\n<sup>1</sup> Capitalized terms not defined herein have the meanings given to them in the Motion.\n\ntherein in accordance with 28 U.S.C. §§ 157 and 1334 and the *Standing Order of Reference* from the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut (as amended); and consideration of the Motion and the relief requested therein being a core proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(b); and venue being proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1408 and 1409; and the Court having found that the relief requested in the Motion, as modified herein, is in the best interest of the Estate, its creditors, and all parties in interest; and due and sufficient notice of the Motion having been given under the particular circumstances; and it appearing that no other or further notice need be given; and upon all of the proceedings had before this Court; and any objections to the relief requested herein having been withdrawn or overruled on the merits; and after due deliberation and sufficient cause appearing therefor, it is hereby ORDERED THAT:\n\n1. The Motion is granted to the extent set forth herein.\n\n2. The Trustee has exclusive control of any attorney-client privilege, work product protection, or any related privilege or protection that could otherwise be asserted by the Debtor or his counsel under any applicable law (including, without limitation, any interests of the Debtor in any common interest or joint defense privilege alleged to be held with other parties) (each, a \"Trustee Privilege\" and, together, the \"Trustee Privileges\") concerning (i) assets (including actual or potential causes of action) that (A) are or were held by the Debtor, (B) are or were held by others that the Trustee is investigating pursuant to the Rule 2004 Subpoenas for purposes of determining whether they hold or may have information about assets in which the Debtor holds or may have held an interest, or (C) otherwise relate to, or could conceivably be brought into, the Debtor's estate,2 (ii) the Debtor's financial condition (including, without limitation, liabilities of\n\n<sup>2</sup> Forms of the Rule 2004 Subpoenas, including document requests, were attached to the Trustee's 2004 Motions as follows: as to the Debtor 2004 Motion, Exhibit B; as to the Professionals 2004 Motion, Exhibits C-1\n\nthe estate), or (iii) activities related to the administration of the estate (including, without limitation, the preparation of schedules and the preparation of the *Declaration of Mr. Ho Wan Kwok in Support of the Chapter 11 Case and Certain Motions*) during the period between the petition date and the issuance of the order appointing the Trustee on July 8, 2022 (topics (i) through (iii), collectively, the \"Investigation Topics\").\n\n3. Neither the Debtor nor his counsel (based on instructions from the Debtor or any person acting on behalf of the Debtor), nor any other examinee, is entitled to withhold any of the documents and information requested in the attachments to the Rule 2004 subpoenas on the basis of any Trustee Privileges concerning the Investigation Topics.\n\n4. Nothing herein shall prevent the Debtor from asserting any and all privileges concerning legal matters unrelated to the Investigation Topics, such as unrelated criminal allegations (*e.g.*, allegations related to rape or false imprisonment that have been made against the Debtor) or the Debtor's asylum application (other than documents related to the litigation styled as *Guo Wengui v. Clark Hill, PLC*, Case No. 19-cv-03195 (D. D.C.), which does not relate to the substance of the asylum application). The Trustee and the Debtor reserve all rights with respect to any privileges claimed over such other matters.\n\n5. To the extent the Trustee receives documents or information from the Debtor or his counsel or other advisors relating to facts, allegations, or issues arising in adversary proceedings against the Debtor asserting non-dischargeability, the Trustee will (i) not share such documents and information with the plaintiffs in such adversary proceedings, and (ii) keep such\n\nthrough C-14; and as to the Third-Party Motion, Exhibits C-1 through C-19. They are incorporated herein by reference.\n\ndocuments and information confidential as required by any confidentiality stipulation or protective order to be entered in this case.\n\n6. For the avoidance of doubt, the Trustee has exclusive control over all postpetition documents and files in the possession or control of Brown Rudnick LLP and Verdolino & Lowey, P.C. in connection with their representation of the Debtor in this case.\n\n7. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, to the extent the Debtor believes in good faith that particular documents or information that are covered by a Trustee Privilege and that concern the Investigation Topics could result in personal harm to the Debtor if disclosed to the Trustee, then (i) the Debtor or his counsel, as applicable, shall, by the applicable production deadline, log all such documents in accordance with the requirements of D. Conn. L. Civ. R. 26(e) and/or identify all such non-documentary information in a manner necessary to support the claim of privilege, including with sufficient information to identify the basis for asserting the potential for personal harm,<sup>3</sup> and (ii) either party may file a motion with the Court to have the question of control of the privilege over any logged documents or other information decided on an expedited basis, and the Debtor may request that the Court, in making such decision, undertake a further balancing analysis in accordance with applicable case law. For purposes of this paragraph, \"expedited basis\" shall require a response to any motion within four days, and any reply within two days thereafter; the Court shall then either rule on the papers or hold a hearing on the motion at its earliest convenience. The Court may as part of its consideration of any such motion require the production of logged documents and information to the Court for *in*\n\n<sup>3</sup> Consistent with applicable discovery rules, the Debtor may withhold from production (using appropriate redactions as necessary) only that portion of such document or information that is subject to the Debtor's claim of privilege and good-faith belief regarding personal harm; all other portions of such document or information must be produced to the Trustee.\n\n*camera* inspection. For the avoidance of doubt, the possibility that the disclosure of the documents or information in question could result in the Trustee identifying potential assets of the estate, or could constitute evidence relating to the ownership or control of assets by the Debtor, shall not constitute \"personal harm to the Debtor\" sufficient to withhold documents or information pursuant to this paragraph, regardless of any position or opinion of the Debtor regarding the ownership or control of such assets.\n\n8. For purposes of this order only, the term \"control\" as used herein with respect to any Trustee Privilege shall mean that the Trustee is able to review, access, and otherwise use all documents and information subject to such privilege in carrying out his duties and responsibilities in this case, including without limitation in prosecuting actions to recover property of the estate; provided, however, the Trustee shall not be entitled to waive any Trustee Privilege (for example, by disclosing privileged documents or information on the public docket of this case or by sharing such documents or information with a third party) absent further order of the Court, and all filings by the Trustee containing or describing documents or information covered by a Trustee Privilege shall be filed under seal. The parties reserve all their respective rights as to any future request by the Trustee to waive a Trustee Privilege. Any such request to waive a Trustee Privilege may be made by motion on an expedited basis in accordance with the procedures described in paragraph 7.\n\n9. Nothing herein shall be construed to impact, one way or another, the Debtor or the Debtor's counsel's rights, whatever they may be, to assert whatever privileges the Debtor may have under the laws of the United Kingdom in the litigation styled *Kwok Ho Wan v. UBS AG*, Claim No. CL-2020-000345 (High Court of Justice Business and Property Courts of England and Wales Commercial Court).\n\n10. Nothing herein shall be construed to impact the Debtor's 5th Amendment Privilege under the United States Constitution.\n\n11. Neither the Debtor nor his counsel (based on instructions from the Debtor or any person acting on behalf of the Debtor ), nor any other examinee, shall interfere with, hinder, or delay the Trustee's exercise of the authority under this Order.\n\n12. Nothing herein shall be construed to preclude the Trustee or the Debtor, including through their respective counsel, from disputing the application of this Order to particular documents or information.\n\n13. The Trustee is authorized and empowered to take all actions necessary to effectuate the relief granted in this Order.\n\n14. The terms and conditions of this Order shall be immediately effective and enforceable upon its entry.\n\n15. This Court shall retain jurisdiction with respect to all matters arising from or related to the implementation, interpretation, and enforcement of this Order.\n\n# Exhibit B\n\n#### **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION**\n\n| ----------------------------------------------------------- | x                                 |\n|-------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------|\n| In re:                                                      | :<br>:<br>Chapter 11<br>:         |\n| HO WAN KWOK,                                                | :<br>Case No. 22-50073 (JAM)<br>: |\n| Debtor.                                                     | :<br>:                            |\n| ----------------------------------------------------------- | x                                 |\n\n## **NOTICE OF REVISED PROPOSED ORDER REGARDING CONTROL OF ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE, WORK PRODUCT PROTECTION, AND OTHER PRIVILEGES RELATED TO RULE 2004 SUBPOENAED DOCUMENTS AND INFORMATION**\n\nUpon the motion (the \"Motion\") of Mr. Luc A. Despins, in his capacity as the chapter 11 trustee (the \"Trustee\") appointed in the chapter 11 case of Ho Wan Kwok (the \"Debtor\"), for the entry of an order (this \"Order\"), pursuant to sections 323, 521, 541, and 1108 of title 11 of the United States Code (the \"Bankruptcy Code\"), rule 2004 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure (the \"Bankruptcy Rules\"), and the Court's orders granting the Trustee's motions for examination pursuant to Rule 2004, (a) confirming that the Trustee owns and controls the attorney-client privilege, work product protection and other privileges on issues related to the Debtor's assets and financial affairs and the administration of his estate, (b) directing that the Discovery Recipients not withhold documents from the Trustee on account of any such privileges in responding to the Rule 2004 Subpoenas,<sup>1</sup> or attempt to assert any such privileges that are properly owned by the Trustee and (c) granting related relief, all as more fully set forth in the Motion; and this Court having jurisdiction to consider the Motion and the relief requested therein in accordance with 28 U.S.C. §§ 157 and 1334 and the *Standing Order of Reference* from the\n\n<sup>1</sup> Capitalized terms not defined herein have the meanings given to them in the Motion.\n\nUnited States District Court for the District of Connecticut (as amended); and consideration of the Motion and the relief requested therein being a core proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(b); and venue being proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1408 and 1409; and the Court having found that the relief requested in the Motion, as modified herein, is in the best interest of the Estate, its creditors, and all parties in interest; and due and sufficient notice of the Motion having been given under the particular circumstances; and it appearing that no other or further notice need be given; and upon all of the proceedings had before this Court; and any objections to the relief requested herein having been withdrawn or overruled on the merits; and after due deliberation and sufficient cause appearing therefor, it is hereby ORDERED THAT:\n\n1. The Motion is granted to the extent set forth herein.\n\n2. The Trustee has exclusive control of any attorney-client privilege, work product protection, or any related privilege or protection that could otherwise be asserted by the Debtor or his counsel under any applicable law (including, without limitation, any interests of the Debtor in any common interest or joint defense privilege alleged to be held with other parties) (each, a \"Trustee Privilege\" and, together, the \"Trustee Privileges\") concerning (i) assets (including actual or potential causes of action) that (A) are or were held by the Debtor, (B) are or were held by others that the Trustee is investigating pursuant to the Rule 2004 Subpoenas for purposes of determining whether they hold or may have information about assets in which the Debtor holds or may have held an interest, or (C) otherwise relate to, or could conceivably be brought into, the Debtor's estate,<sup>2</sup> (ii) the Debtor's financial condition (including, without limitation, liabilities of the estate), or (iii) activities related to the administration of the estate (including, without limitation, the preparation of schedules and the preparation of the *Declaration of Mr. Ho Wan*\n\n<sup>2</sup> Forms of the Rule 2004 Subpoenas, including document requests, were attached to the Trustee's 2004 Motions as follows: as to the Debtor 2004 Motion, Exhibit B; as to the Professionals 2004 Motion, Exhibits C-1 through C-14; and as to the Third-Party Motion, Exhibits C-1 through C-19. They are incorporated herein by reference.\n\n*Kwok in Support of the Chapter 11 Case and Certain Motions*) during the period between the petition date and the issuance of the order appointing the Trustee on July 8, 2022 (topics (i) through (iii), collectively, the \"Investigation Topics\").\n\n3. Neither the Debtor nor his counsel (based on instructions from the Debtor or any person acting on behalf of the Debtor), nor any other examinee, is entitled to withhold any of the documents and information requested in the attachments to the Rule 2004 subpoenas on the basis of any Trustee Privileges concerning the Investigation Topics.\n\n4. Nothing herein shall prevent the Debtor from asserting any and all privileges concerning legal matters unrelated to the Investigation Topics, such as unrelated criminal allegations (*e.g.*, allegations related to rape or false imprisonment that have been made against the Debtor) or the Debtor's asylum application (other than documents related to the litigation styled as *Guo Wengui v. Clark Hill, PLC*, Case No. 19-cv-03195 (D. D.C.), which does not relate to the substance of the asylum application). The Trustee and the Debtor reserve all rights with respect to any privileges claimed over such other matters.\n\n5. To the extent the Trustee receives documents or information from the Debtor or his counsel or other advisors relating to facts, allegations, or issues arising in adversary proceedings against the Debtor asserting non-dischargeability, the Trustee will (i) not share such documents and information with the plaintiffs in such adversary proceedings, and (ii) keep such documents and information confidential as required by any confidentiality stipulation or protective order to be entered in this case.\n\n6. For the avoidance of doubt, the Trustee has exclusive control over all post-petition documents and files in the possession or control of Brown Rudnick LLP and Verdolino & Lowey, P.C. in connection with their representation of the Debtor in this case.\n\n7. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, to the extent the Debtor believes in good faith that particular documents or information that are covered by a Trustee Privilege and that concern the Investigation Topics could result in personal harm to the Debtor if disclosed to the Trustee, then (i) the Debtor or his counsel, as applicable, shall, by the applicable production deadline, log all such documents in accordance with the requirements of D. Conn. L. Civ. R. 26(e) and/or identify all such non-documentary information in a manner necessary to support the claim of privilege, including with sufficient information to identify the basis for asserting the potential for personal harm,<sup>3</sup> and (ii) either party may file a motion with the Court to have the question of control of the privilege over any logged documents or other information decided on an expedited basis, and the Debtor may request that the Court, in making such decision, undertake a further balancing analysis in accordance with applicable case law. For purposes of this paragraph, \"expedited basis\" shall require a response to any motion within four days, and any reply within two days thereafter; the Court shall then either rule on the papers or hold a hearing on the motion at its earliest convenience. The Court may as part of its consideration of any such motion require the production of logged documents and information to the Court for *in camera* inspection. For the avoidance of doubt, the possibility that the disclosure of the documents or information in question could result in the Trustee identifying potential assets of the estate, or could constitute evidence relating to the ownership or control of assets by the Debtor, shall not constitute \"personal harm to the Debtor\" sufficient to withhold documents or information pursuant to this paragraph, regardless of any position or opinion of the Debtor regarding the ownership or control of such assets.\n\n<sup>3</sup> Consistent with applicable discovery rules, the Debtor may withhold from production (using appropriate redactions as necessary) only that portion of such document or information that is subject to the Debtor's claim of privilege and good-faith belief regarding personal harm; all other portions of such document or information must be produced to the Trustee.\n\n8. For purposes of this order only, the term \"control\" as used herein with respect to any Trustee Privilege shall mean that the Trustee is able to review, access, and otherwise use all documents and information subject to such privilege in carrying out his duties and responsibilities in this case, including without limitation in prosecuting actions to recover property of the estate; provided, however, the Trustee shall not be entitled to waive any Trustee Privilege (for example, by disclosing privileged documents or information on the public docket of this case or by sharing such documents or information with a third party) absent further order of the Court, and all filings by the Trustee containing or describing documents or information covered by a Trustee Privilege shall be filed under seal. The parties reserve all their respective rights as to any future request by the Trustee to waive a Trustee Privilege. Any such request to waive a Trustee Privilege may be made by motion on an expedited basis in accordance with the procedures described in paragraph 7.\n\n9. Nothing herein shall be construed to impact, one way or another, the Debtor or the Debtor's counsel's rights, whatever they may be, to assert whatever privileges the Debtor may have under the laws of the United Kingdom in the litigation styled *Kwok Ho Wan v. UBS AG*, Claim No. CL-2020-000345 (High Court of Justice Business and Property Courts of England and Wales Commercial Court).\n\n7. Nothing herein shall be construed to impact the Debtor's 5th 10. Amendment Privilege under the United States Constitution.\n\n11. 8. Neither the Debtor nor his counsel (based on instructions from the Debtor or any person acting on behalf of the Debtor ), nor any other examinee, shall interfere with, hinder, or delay the Trustee's exercise of the authority under this Order.\n\n12. 9. Nothing herein shall be construed to preclude the Trustee or the Debtor,\n\nincluding through their respective counsel, from disputing the application of this Order to particular documents or information.\n\n13. 10. The Trustee is authorized and empowered to take all actions necessary to effectuate the relief granted in this Order.\n\n14. 11. The terms and conditions of this Order shall be immediately effective and enforceable upon its entry.\n\n15. 12. This Court shall retain jurisdiction with respect to all matters arising from or related to the implementation, interpretation, and enforcement of this Order.","body_zh":"美国破产法院康涅狄格联邦地区布里奇波特分庭（UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION）\n\n------------------------------------------------------　x\n\n关于：　:\n:　第11章\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵），　:\n:\n:　案号 22-50073 (JAM)\n债务人。　:\n\n------------------------------------------------------　x\n关于提交进一步修订的拟议命令的通知：就一项命令动议，(A) 规定与依据规则2004传唤的文件有关的任何律师—客户特权、工作成果保护及其他特权的控制权于受托人获任命时移交受托人，(B) 指示债务人及其他受询问人不得以该等特权为由扣留文件，以及 (C) 授予相关救济\n\nLuc A. Despins（卢克·A·德斯平）以其作为在 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）第11章案件中获任命的第11章受托人（下称“受托人”）的身份，特此提交本进一步修订的拟议命令提交通知，以支持其请求作出命令的动议 [ECF No. 777]（下称“该动议”）：(a) 确认受托人拥有并控制与债务人资产及财务事务以及其破产财产管理有关事项的律师—客户特权、工作成果保护及其他特权，(b) 指示取证材料接收方在答复规则2004传票时不得以任何该等特权为由向受托人扣留文件，1 或试图主张任何由受托人适当拥有的该等特权，以及 (c) 授予相关救济。\n\n1 本文未定义的首字母大写术语具有该动议中赋予其的含义。\n\n在2022年9月6日就该动议举行的续行听证会之后，受托人已努力就该动议可能的协商一致解决方案与债务人进一步会谈协商。为此，受托人已拟备一份进一步修订的拟议命令（下称“经进一步修订的受托人拟议命令”），作为附件A（净本）及附件B（与 ECF 823 所载受托人先前拟议命令的修订对照稿）附于本通知，其中载有两个新增段落，旨在回应债务人就该动议所请求救济提出的某些关切。具体而言，受托人已加入：(i) 一段规定某项程序的文字，该程序允许债务人在特定情形下就管辖特定文件或信息的特权向法院请求进一步裁定；如该等文件或信息披露给受托人，可能对债务人造成个人损害；以及 (ii) 一段说明受托人对债务人特权的控制将使受托人有权获取及以其他方式使用享有特权的文件和信息，但未经法院进一步命令，受托人不得放弃任何特权。\n\n具体而言，加入经进一步修订的受托人拟议命令的两个新增段落如下：\n\n7. 尽管本文有任何相反规定，如债务人善意认为，受受托人特权涵盖且涉及调查事项的特定文件或信息，如披露给受托人，可能对债务人造成个人损害，则 (i) 债务人或其律师（视情况而定）应在适用的提交期限前，依照 D. Conn. L. Civ. R. 26(e) 的要求，列明所有该等文件，及/或以支持特权主张所必需的方式识别所有该等非文件信息，包括提供足以识别主张可能造成个人损害之依据的信息，2 以及 (ii) 任一方均可向法院提交动议，请求以加急方式裁定对任何已列明文件或其他信息之特权的控制权问题，且债务人可请求法院在作出该等裁定时，依照适用判例法进行进一步的利益衡量分析。就本段而言，“加急方式”应要求在四日内对任何动议作出答复，并在此后两日内提交任何回复；法院随后应根据书面材料作出裁定，或在其最早方便时就该动议举行听证会。法院可作为审议任何该等动议的一部分，要求向法院提交已列明的文件和信息以供非公开审查。为免生疑，相关文件或信息的披露可能导致受托人识别出破产财产的潜在资产，或可能构成与债务人对资产的所有权或控制权有关的证据，不应构成足以使债务人依据本段扣留文件或信息的“对债务人的个人损害”，无论债务人对该等资产的所有权或控制权持有何种立场或意见。\n\n2 与适用的取证规则一致，债务人仅可拒绝提交该等文件或信息中受债务人特权主张及其关于个人损害之善意信念所约束的部分（必要时采用适当的删节）；该等文件或信息的所有其他部分必须提交给受托人。\n\n8. 仅就本命令而言，本文就任何受托人特权所使用的“控制”一词，系指受托人在履行其于本案中的职责和责任时，能够审阅、获取及以其他方式使用受该等特权约束的所有文件和信息，包括但不限于在提起追回破产财产的诉讼时；但前提是，未经法院进一步命令，受托人无权放弃任何受托人特权（例如，通过在本案公开案卷中披露享有特权的文件或信息，或通过与第三方分享该等文件或信息），且受托人提交的任何包含或描述受受托人特权涵盖之文件或信息的文件，均应密封提交。各方就受托人日后提出的任何放弃受托人特权请求，保留各自的一切权利。任何该等放弃受托人特权的请求，均可依照第7段所述程序以加急方式通过动议提出。\n\n受托人于昨日下午已将经修订拟议命令的该等文字与债务人的律师分享，但债务人尚未就是否该等修订解决其对该动议的异议作出回应。然而，无论债务人的立场如何，受托人均同意经进一步修订的受托人拟议命令，并请求法院将其录入。\n\n如债务人能够在2022年9月12日的续行听证会前告知法院，对该命令的修订解决了其异议，则经进一步修订的受托人拟议命令可经同意录入。否则，受托人请求在债务人提出的任何剩余异议下仍予录入。\n\n除上述新增的第7和第8段外，受托人还在经进一步修订的受托人拟议命令中加入文字，表明其不反对债务人的立场，即该命令中的任何内容均无意影响债务人在题为 Kwok Ho Wan v. UBS AG, Claim No. CL-2020-000345（High Court of Justice Business and Property Courts of England and Wales Commercial Court）的诉讼中依据英国法律享有的特权权利；该诉讼受本法院另一项单独命令的管辖。3\n\n日期：2022年9月9日　　　　　　　LUC A. DESPINS（卢克·A·德斯平），康涅狄格州纽黑文\n　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　第11章受托人\n\n签署人：/s/ Patrick R. Linsey\n\nPatrick R. Linsey（帕特里克·R·林赛）(ct29437)\nNEUBERT, PEPE & MONTEITH, P.C.（诺伊伯特、佩佩及蒙泰思专业公司）\n195 Church Street, 13th Floor\nNew Haven, Connecticut 06510\n(203) 781-2847\nplinsey@npmlaw.com\n\n以及\n\nNicholas A. Bassett（尼古拉斯·A·巴西特）(pro hac vice pending)\nPAUL HASTINGS LLP（保罗·黑斯廷斯律师事务所）\n2050 M Street NW\nWashington, D.C., 20036\n(202) 551-1902\nnicholasbassett@paulhastings.com\n\n3 为免生疑，经进一步修订的受托人拟议命令并未处理受托人先前拟议命令 [ECF 823] 与债务人拟议命令 [ECF 824] 之间存在的所有问题。该等问题载于受托人日期为2022年9月7日的补充提交文件 [ECF 835]，除经进一步修订的受托人拟议命令所处理的范围外，仍未解决。\n\n以及\n\nAvram E. Luft（阿夫拉姆·E·卢夫特）(pro hac vice pending)\nDouglass Barron（道格拉斯·巴伦）(pro hac vice pending)\nPAUL HASTINGS LLP（保罗·黑斯廷斯律师事务所）\n200 Park Avenue\nNew York, New York 10166\n(212) 318-6079\naviluft@paulhastings.com\n\n第11章受托人律师\n附件A\n美国破产法院康涅狄格联邦地区布里奇波特分庭（UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION）\n\n------------------------------------------------------　x\n\n关于：　:\n:　第11章\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵），　:\n:\n:　案号 22-50073 (JAM)\n债务人。　:\n\n------------------------------------------------------　x\n关于与依据规则2004传唤的文件和信息有关的律师—客户特权、工作成果保护及其他特权控制权的命令\n\n经审理 Luc A. Despins（卢克·A·德斯平）先生以其作为在 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）第11章案件中获任命的第11章受托人（下称“受托人”）的身份提出的动议（下称“该动议”），请求依据 United States Code（美国法典）第11编（下称“破产法”）第323、521、541和1108条、Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure（联邦破产程序规则）（下称“破产规则”）规则2004，以及法院准许受托人依据规则2004提出审查询问动议的命令，作出一项命令（下称“本命令”），以 (a) 确认受托人拥有并控制与债务人资产及财务事务以及其破产财产管理有关事项的律师—客户特权、工作成果保护及其他特权，(b) 指示取证材料接收方在答复规则2004传票时不得以任何该等特权为由向受托人扣留文件，1 或试图主张任何由受托人适当拥有的该等特权，以及 (c) 授予相关救济，具体内容均载于该动议；且本法院根据 28 U.S.C. §§ 157 and 1334 以及 United States District Court for the District of Connecticut（康涅狄格联邦地区美国联邦地区法院）的移送管辖常设命令（经修订）对审理该动议及其中请求的救济享有管辖权；且根据 28 U.S.C. § 157(b)，对该动议及其中请求救济的审理属于核心程序；且根据 28 U.S.C. §§ 1408 and 1409，本法院为适格审判地；且法院已认定，经本文修改的该动议所请求救济符合破产财产、其债权人及所有利害关系方的最佳利益；且在特定情形下已就该动议给予适当且充分的通知；且看来无需给予其他或进一步通知；且基于本法院前进行的一切程序；且对本文所请求救济的任何异议已被撤回或经实体审理被驳回；且经适当审议并显示存在充分理由，特此命令：\n\n1. 该动议在本文规定的范围内获准。\n\n2. 受托管理人对涉及下列事项的任何律师—当事人特权、工作成果保护，或债务人或其律师原本可依据任何适用法律主张的任何相关特权或保护（包括但不限于债务人在被指称与其他当事人共同享有的任何共同利益特权或共同辩护特权中所享有的任何权益）（各称为“受托管理人特权”，合称为“受托管理人特权”）享有排他性控制权：(i) 资产（包括实际或潜在的诉因），该等资产(A)现由或曾由债务人持有，(B)现由或曾由他人持有，且受托管理人正根据Rule 2004传票进行调查，以确定该等他人是否持有或可能持有关于债务人现有或可能曾拥有权益的资产的信息，或(C)以其他方式与债务人的破产财产有关，或可以想见会被纳入债务人的破产财产；2 (ii) 债务人的财务状况（包括但不限于破产财产的负债）；或(iii) 在申请日与2022年7月8日作出指定受托管理人命令期间，与破产财产管理有关的活动（包括但不限于编制清单，以及编制Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）先生支持第11章案件及若干动议的声明）（第(i)至(iii)项合称为“调查事项”）。\n\n2 Rule 2004传票的格式，包括文件请求，已作为附件附于受托管理人的2004动议中，具体如下：就债务人2004动议而言，为附件B；就专业人士2004动议而言，为附件C-1至C-14；就第三方动议而言，为附件C-1至C-19。该等附件通过援引纳入本文。\n\n3. 债务人或其律师（基于债务人或代表债务人行事的任何人的指示），以及任何其他受询问人，均无权以涉及调查事项的任何受托管理人特权为依据，扣留Rule 2004传票附件中所请求的任何文件和信息。\n\n4. 本文任何内容均不妨碍债务人就与调查事项无关的法律事项主张任何及全部特权，例如无关的刑事指控（例如针对债务人提出的与强奸或非法拘禁有关的指控）或债务人的庇护申请（但与Guo Wengui v. Clark Hill, PLC, Case No. 19-cv-03195 (D. D.C.)案诉讼有关的文件除外，该案与庇护申请的实质内容无关）。受托管理人和债务人保留就该等其他事项所主张的任何特权享有的一切权利。\n\n5. 如受托管理人从债务人、其律师或其他顾问处收到与针对债务人提起的主张不可免责性的对抗程序中产生的事实、指控或争议有关的文件或信息，受托管理人将(i)不与该等对抗程序中的原告分享该等文件和信息，且(ii)依照本案中将作出的任何保密约定或保护令的要求，对该等文件和信息予以保密。\n\n6. 为免生疑，受托管理人对Brown Rudnick LLP和Verdolino & Lowey, P.C.因在本案中代理债务人而持有或控制的所有申请后文件和档案享有排他性控制权。\n\n7. 尽管本文有任何相反规定，如债务人善意地认为，受托管理人特权所涵盖且涉及调查事项的特定文件或信息，如向受托管理人披露，可能对债务人造成个人损害，则(i)债务人或其律师（视情况而定）应于适用的提交截止日期前，依照D. Conn. L. Civ. R. 26(e)的要求，将所有该等文件列入特权日志，和/或以支持特权主张所必需的方式识别所有该等非文件信息，包括提供足以确定主张可能造成个人损害之依据的信息；3 以及(ii)任一方均可向法院提出动议，请求法院以加急方式裁定对任何已列入日志的文件或其他信息的特权控制权问题，且债务人可请求法院在作出该等裁定时，依照适用判例法进行进一步的利益衡量分析。就本段而言，“加急方式”要求在四日内对任何动议作出回应，并在其后二日内提交任何答复；法院随后应根据书面材料作出裁定，或在其最早方便的时间就该动议举行听证会。法院在审议任何该等动议时，可要求向法院提交已列入日志的文件和信息以进行不公开审查。为免生疑，所涉文件或信息的披露可能导致受托管理人识别破产财产的潜在资产，或可能构成与债务人对资产的所有权或控制权有关的证据，无论债务人对该等资产的所有权或控制权持何种立场或意见，均不构成足以依本段扣留文件或信息的“对债务人的个人损害”。\n\n3 根据适用的证据开示规则，债务人仅可扣留该等文件或信息中受债务人特权主张及其关于个人损害的善意信念所约束的部分（必要时采用适当遮盖）；该等文件或信息的所有其他部分必须提交给受托管理人。\n\n8. 仅为本裁定之目的，本文就任何受托管理人特权所使用的“控制”一词，是指受托管理人在履行其在本案中的职责和责任时，能够审阅、获取并以其他方式使用受该等特权约束的所有文件和信息，包括但不限于提起追索破产财产的诉讼；但除非法院另有命令，受托管理人无权放弃任何受托管理人特权（例如，通过在本案公开案卷中披露享有特权的文件或信息，或与第三方分享该等文件或信息），且受托管理人提交的含有或描述受托管理人特权所涵盖文件或信息的所有文件，均应密封提交。各方保留其各自就受托管理人未来任何放弃受托管理人特权的请求享有的一切权利。任何该等放弃受托管理人特权的请求，均可依照第7段所述程序以加急方式通过动议提出。\n\n9. 本文任何内容均不得被解释为以任何方式影响债务人或债务人的律师在Kwok Ho Wan v. UBS AG, Claim No. CL-2020-000345 (High Court of Justice Business and Property Courts of England and Wales Commercial Court)案诉讼中，根据英国法律主张债务人可能享有的任何特权的权利，无论该等权利为何。\n\n10. 本文任何内容均不得被解释为影响债务人依据美国宪法享有的第五修正案特权。\n\n11. 债务人或其律师（基于债务人或代表债务人行事的任何人的指示），以及任何其他受询问人，均不得干扰、阻碍或延迟受托管理人行使本裁定项下的授权。\n\n12. 本文任何内容均不得被解释为禁止受托管理人或债务人，包括通过其各自律师，就本裁定对特定文件或信息的适用性提出争议。\n\n13. 受托管理人获授权并有权采取一切必要行动，以落实本裁定授予的救济。\n\n14. 本裁定的条款和条件应于登记后立即生效并可执行。\n\n15. 本法院应保留对因实施、解释及执行本裁定而产生或与之相关的一切事项的管辖权。\n\n附件B\n\nUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION（康涅狄格州美国破产法院布里奇波特分部）\n\n-----------------------------------------------------------　x\n\n关于：　:\n:\n第11章\n\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵），　:\nCase No. 22-50073 (JAM)\n:\n债务人。　:\n\n-----------------------------------------------------------　x\n\n关于对与Rule 2004传票所要求文件和信息有关的律师—当事人特权、工作成果保护及其他特权之控制权的修订拟议裁定通知\n\n兹因Luc A. Despins先生以其作为Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）第11章案件中指定的第11章受托管理人（“受托管理人”）的身份提出动议（“动议”），请求根据United States Code（美国法典）title 11（“破产法”）sections 323, 521, 541, and 1108、Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure（联邦破产程序规则）（“破产规则”）rule 2004，以及本法院准许受托管理人根据Rule 2004提出审查询问动议的命令，作出命令（“本裁定”），以(a)确认受托管理人拥有并控制与债务人的资产和财务事务及其破产财产管理有关事项的律师—当事人特权、工作成果保护及其他特权，(b)指示文件开示接收人（Discovery Recipients）在答复Rule 2004传票时，不得以任何该等特权为由向受托管理人扣留文件，1 或试图主张任何应由受托管理人适当拥有的该等特权，以及(c)授予相关救济；详见动议；且本法院根据28 U.S.C. §§ 157 and 1334及United States District Court for the District of Connecticut（康涅狄格州联邦地区美国联邦地区法院）的移送常设命令（经修订），对审理该动议及其中请求的救济享有管辖权；且根据28 U.S.C. § 157(b)，审理该动议及其中请求的救济属于核心程序；且根据28 U.S.C. §§ 1408 and 1409，本法院为适格审判地；且法院已认定，经本文修订的动议所请求救济符合破产财产、其债权人及所有利害关系方的最佳利益；且在具体情形下已就动议发出适当且充分的通知；且看来无需发出其他或进一步通知；且根据本法院此前进行的所有程序；且对本文所请求救济的任何异议已被撤回或经实体审理后驳回；且经适当审议并有充分理由，现据此命令：\n\n1. 动议在本文规定的范围内获准。\n\n1 本文未定义的首字母大写术语具有动议中赋予该等术语的含义。\n\n2. 受托人对债务人或其律师依据任何适用法律原可主张的、与下列事项有关的任何律师—当事人特权、工作成果保护，或任何相关特权或保护（包括但不限于债务人在被主张为与其他方共同持有的任何共同利益或联合辩护特权中的任何权益）享有独占控制权（各称为“一项受托人特权”，合称为“受托人特权”）：(i) 资产（包括实际或潜在的诉因），该等资产（A）现由或曾由债务人持有，(B）现由或曾由他人持有，而受托人正依据 Rule 2004 Subpoenas 为确定该等他人是否持有或可能持有关于债务人现持有或可能曾持有权益的资产的信息而进行调查，或（C）以其他方式与债务人的破产财产有关，或可设想被纳入债务人的破产财产；2 (ii) 债务人的财务状况（包括但不限于破产财产的负债），或 (iii) 自申请日起至 2022年7月8日作出任命受托人的命令期间与破产财产管理有关的活动（包括但不限于编制财产清单以及编制 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）支持 Chapter 11 Case 和 Certain Motions 的声明）（第 (i) 至 (iii) 项合称“调查事项”）。\n\n2 Rule 2004 Subpoenas 的表格，包括文件请求，作为附件随受托人的 2004 Motions 提交如下：就 Debtor 2004 Motion 而言，为 Exhibit B；就 Professionals 2004 Motion 而言，为 Exhibits C-1 至 C-14；就 Third-Party Motion 而言，为 Exhibits C-1 至 C-19。上述文件通过援引纳入本文。\n\n3. 债务人或其律师（基于债务人或任何代表债务人行事之人的指示），以及任何其他被询问人，均无权以涉及调查事项的任何受托人特权为由，拒绝提供 Rule 2004 subpoenas 附件中所请求的任何文件和信息。\n\n4. 本文件任何内容均不得阻止债务人就与调查事项无关的法律事务主张任何及全部特权，例如无关的刑事指控（例如针对债务人提出的与强奸或非法拘禁有关的指控）或债务人的庇护申请（与题为 Guo Wengui v. Clark Hill, PLC, Case No. 19-cv-03195 (D. D.C.) 的诉讼有关的文件除外；该诉讼不涉及庇护申请的实质内容）。受托人和债务人均保留就该等其他事项所主张的任何特权享有的全部权利。\n\n5. 如受托人从债务人、其律师或其他顾问处收到与针对债务人主张不可免责性的对抗性程序中产生的事实、指控或争议有关的文件或信息，受托人将：(i) 不与该等对抗性程序中的原告分享该等文件和信息；及 (ii) 按照本案中将作出的任何保密约定或保护令的要求，对该等文件和信息予以保密。\n\n6. 为免生疑义，受托人对 Brown Rudnick LLP 和 Verdolino & Lowey, P.C. 因在本案中代理债务人而持有或控制的所有申请日后文件和档案享有独占控制权。\n\n7. 尽管本文件有任何相反规定，如债务人善意认为，受一项受托人特权涵盖且涉及调查事项的特定文件或信息，如向受托人披露，可能导致债务人遭受人身损害，则：(i) 债务人或其律师（视情况而定）应于适用的提交截止日期前，依照 D. Conn. L. Civ. R. 26(e) 的要求，在特权清单中列明所有该等文件，和/或以支持特权主张所必需的方式识别所有该等非文件性信息，包括提供足以识别主张可能遭受人身损害之依据的信息；3 及 (ii) 任一方均可向法院提出动议，请求以加速方式裁定对任何列入清单的文件或其他信息的特权控制权问题；债务人可请求法院在作出该等裁定时，依照适用判例法进行进一步的利益衡量分析。就本段而言，“加速方式”应要求在四日内对任何动议作出答复，并在其后二日内提交任何回复；法院随后应根据书面材料作出裁定，或在其最早方便的时间就该动议举行听证会。法院在审议任何该等动议时，可要求将列入清单的文件和信息提交法院进行不公开审查。为免生疑义，相关文件或信息的披露可能导致受托人识别出破产财产的潜在资产，或可能构成与债务人对资产的所有权或控制权有关的证据，不论债务人就该等资产的所有权或控制权持何种立场或意见，均不构成足以依本段拒绝提供文件或信息的“债务人人身损害”。\n\n3 根据适用的证据开示规则，债务人仅可拒绝提交该等文件或信息中受债务人特权主张及其关于人身损害的善意信念所涵盖的部分（必要时采用适当删节）；该等文件或信息的所有其他部分均必须提交给受托人。\n\n8. 仅就本命令而言，本文就任何受托人特权所使用的“控制”一词，系指受托人能够在履行其在本案中的职责和责任时审阅、获取及以其他方式使用受该等特权保护的所有文件和信息，包括但不限于提起追回破产财产的诉讼；但未经法院进一步命令，受托人无权放弃任何受托人特权（例如，通过在本案公开案卷中披露受特权保护的文件或信息，或与第三方分享该等文件或信息），且受托人提交的任何包含或描述受一项受托人特权涵盖的文件或信息的文件，均应密封提交。各方保留就受托人未来任何请求放弃受托人特权所享有的各自全部权利。任何该等放弃受托人特权的请求，均可依照第 7 段所述程序以加速方式通过动议提出。\n\n9. 本文件任何内容均不得被解释为以任何方式影响债务人或债务人的律师在题为 Kwok Ho Wan v. UBS AG, Claim No. CL-2020-000345 (High Court of Justice Business and Property Courts of England and Wales Commercial Court) 的诉讼中，根据英国法律主张债务人可能享有的任何特权的权利，不论该等权利为何。\n\n10. 本文件任何内容均不得被解释为影响债务人依据 United States Constitution 享有的 Fifth Amendment Privilege。\n\n11. 债务人或其律师（基于债务人或任何代表债务人行事之人的指示），以及任何其他被询问人，均不得干预、阻碍或延误受托人行使本命令项下的授权。\n\n12. 本文件任何内容均不得被解释为禁止受托人或债务人，包括通过其各自律师，就本命令对特定文件或信息的适用提出争议。\n\n13. 授权并赋予受托人采取一切必要行动，以落实本命令所给予的救济。\n\n14. 本命令的条款和条件自录入之时起立即生效并可执行。\n\n15. 本法院对因执行、解释和实施本命令而产生或与之有关的一切事项保留管辖权。","key_entities":["Je","Kwok","Ho Wan Kwok","Despins","Guo","Paul Hastings"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":777,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":823,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":824,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":835,"court":"CTB"}],"word_count":4856,"status":"published","published_at":null,"created_at":null,"updated_at":"2026-08-23 18:44:04"}