(文/孙梅欣 编辑/张广凯） 娃哈哈宗庆后遗产纠纷案8月1日在香港高等法院做出判决，法院要求宗馥莉方及JIAN HAO VENTURES LIMITED（建浩创投有限公司）保全18亿美元信托，对三名非婚生子女的信托资产保全要 求予以支持。 根据智通财经报道，当日下午4点，香港高等法院就对这场遗产争夺案进行聆讯，聆讯结果没有即时对 公众公开，由双方律师代表前来领取签收。当日下午6点，香港高等法院在官网公布了判决全文。 此次遗产纠纷案诉讼起于2024年12月，原告方宗继昌（Jacky ZONG）、宗婕莉（Jessie Jisheng Zong） 和宗继盛（Jerry Jisheng Zong）起诉宗馥莉JIAN HAO VENTURES LIMITED（建浩创投有限公司）。 三人声称宗庆后生前通过香港汇丰银行为他们设立了总价值21亿美元的离岸信托基金，并要求确认其受 益人身份。 去年5月，该账户余额约为18亿美元，但宗馥莉曾从中转出108.51万美元用于越南工厂设备尾款，原告 认为此举侵犯其权益，要求法院阻止宗馥莉处理汇丰银行信托账户18亿美元的资产，确保他们每人价值 7亿美元的信托权。 判决中提到，原告方主张协 ...

作者 | 第一财 经 揭书宜、栾立 娃哈哈家族风波近期备受关注。 宗馥莉方面回应称，之所以在设立离岸信托方面动作缓慢，是与原告就草案文件条款进行谈判，宗馥 莉方面认为，固体资本的利息才是信托资产，而并非资本本身，因此双方在此矛盾较大。此外，汇丰 账户中资产价值从未超过21亿美元 ，因此在补足差额前，原告没有理由主张各自获得7亿美元的离 岸信托，而且7亿美元只是理想状态，因此并不承认此前手写指示的有效性，并认为给每个离岸信托 注入7亿美元是不现实的。 2025.08. 01 本文字数：1942，阅读时长大约4分钟 第一财经记者在中国香港司法机构官网查询到，宗继昌、宗婕莉、宗继盛三人与娃哈哈接班人宗馥莉 涉及的案件于8月1日在香港高等法院进行聆讯，聆讯时间为5分钟。 在今天（8月1日）公布的法院文件中，原告提交的证据中包括三份文件，其中包括宗庆后在2024年 1月底手写的设立信托的指示，并指2024年3月14日，宗馥莉与同父异母三兄妹就宗庆后去世签署过 一份协议，其中包括甲方（宗馥莉）承诺，将建浩公司在汇丰银行香港特别行政区开立的账户内的资 产权益，依据协议为三乙方（宗继昌、宗婕莉、宗继盛）设立一个信托(共设三个 ...

第一财经记者在中国香港司法机构官网查询到，宗继昌、宗婕莉、宗继盛三人与娃哈哈接班人宗馥莉涉 及的案件于8月1日在香港高等法院进行聆讯，聆讯时间为5分钟。 娃哈哈风波近期备受关注，涉及信托纠纷和资产转移争议。 娃哈哈家族风波近期备受关注。 公开信息显示，娃哈哈的生产、销售与投资，几乎都掌握在宗庆后家族管理的各个主体中。这些主体大 致划分出四个板块："宏振投资"及旗下公司，负责销售与投资；由宗馥莉持股的"宏胜集团"及旗下公 司，负责生产；此次争议中的杜建英直接控制的"三捷投资"及旗下公司，负责娃哈哈业务之外的投资； 在娃哈哈的经营之外，宗庆后此前设立了一系列投资平台，直接或间接控制了娃哈哈的部分经营主体。 企查查数据显示，截至目前，杜建英控制的企业有23家。杜建英是西湖大学创始捐赠人、荣誉董事；杭 州市上城区娃哈哈三捷教育发展基金会发起人、主要捐赠人等。 第一财经记者注意到，杜建英控制的企业大多为正常经营状态（有4家处于注销状态），但在杜建英关 联的企业中，存在经营异常的情况。近日，杜建英参与投资的浙江兴合实业投资集团有限公司新增一则 被执行人信息，执行标的3005万余元，兴合实业董事长陈教义也被列为失信被执行人 ...

记者丨 张伟泽 实习生王艺之 香港报道 编辑丨朱丽娜 和佳 江佩佩 现场法官并未出庭，只是由双方律师签署文件，而双方当事人也并未出现。 此前，21世纪经济报道记者从香港高等法院获得了娃哈哈集团现任董事长、宗庆后之女宗馥莉 与三位号称"同父异母兄弟姐妹"的信托纠纷案起诉书复印件。 、中方委托乙万以乙力作为欧立人才别以立二个現外信托 (三个信托单独简称为'信托 A' '信托 B'信托 C',合称为 宗氏境外家族信托),信托 A 以宗维昌 [Jacky] 及其子女作 为信托受益人;信托 B 以宗婕莉 [Jessie] 及其子女作为信 托受益人;信托 C 以宗继盛 [Jerry] 及其子女作为信托受益 No 二、本协议第一条所约定之宗氏家族信托受益人仅包括宗继 昌、宗婕莉、宗继盛及其子女,信托利益为他们的婚前个人 财产,受益人不包括该等人士的配偶。 三、甲方委托乙方设立的宗氏家族信托为丕动本信托,即信 托资产继续在 HSBC Hongkong 进行固定收益投资,只就利 息收益进行分配,任何人士不得主张动用信托财产本金向受 益人作分配。 四、在完成上述"三"项之后,对于其他银行存放的财产, 甲方确定将所有资产利益归属于 ...

Core Viewpoint - The ongoing family dispute surrounding Wahaha and the $2.1 billion offshore family trust remains a focal point, with significant uncertainty regarding its establishment and legal validity as the court hearing approaches on August 1, 2025 [1]. Group 1: Trust Establishment and Validity - There is currently no evidence indicating that Zong Qinghou established a legally effective family trust in Hong Kong, as key documents such as trust agreements and asset transfer records are absent [3]. - Oral trusts can theoretically be established in Hong Kong but are rarely used due to high legal risks and insufficient evidence; written trusts are the standard, especially for real estate and family wealth [4][5]. - If Zong Qinghou's children can provide clear evidence of his intent to establish a trust, they may attempt to claim a constructive trust in court, which will be a key observation point [6]. Group 2: Testamentary Trusts vs. Living Trusts - Discussions also revolve around whether a testamentary trust could be established through a will, which requires the will to be valid and effective [9]. - A living trust, if validly established, means that assets transferred to it before the grantor's death do not belong to the estate, making any will provisions regarding those assets ineffective [10]. - The ongoing litigation in Hong Kong may be related to the inheritance case in Hangzhou, as the original plaintiff seeks asset preservation in the context of potential trust claims [10]. Group 3: Role of Jian Hao Ventures Limited - Jian Hao Ventures Limited, registered in the British Virgin Islands and linked to Zong Qinghou's daughter, may serve as a special purpose vehicle (SPV) for the family trust, although its exact relationship with the trust remains unclear [12]. - The company appears to function more as a personal asset platform rather than being controlled by a trust, raising questions about governance and accountability within the trust structure [13]. - The absence of a robust governance mechanism could lead to risks regarding the independence and transparency of the trust, which is critical in legal assessments [13]. Group 4: Legal Applicability Issues - The legal applicability of the offshore family trust is crucial, as courts in different jurisdictions may not necessarily apply the laws of the offshore location where the trust was established [16]. - If the family trust exists, it may be structured as a Foreign Grantor Trust (FGT), which allows the grantor to retain significant control over the trust assets, complicating legal interpretations [16]. - The classification of trusts under U.S. tax law may not hold the same significance in other jurisdictions, emphasizing the need for clarity in legal frameworks across different regions [16].

Core Insights - The financial industry is entering a new phase filled with challenges and opportunities, emphasizing the importance of serving the real economy and enabling high-quality development [1] - Family offices are becoming a focal point for investors as global wealth and wealth management needs grow rapidly, yet the independent family office ecosystem in mainland China remains immature [1][5] Summary by Sections Family Office Development - Family offices in mainland China have been developing for about ten years but have not yet formed a mature ecosystem or gained acceptance among mainstream entrepreneurs [3][5] - The independent family office sector is primarily composed of non-licensed institutions, with most serving single families or multiple families [4][5] Challenges and Issues - The family office industry in mainland China faces several challenges, including a lack of standards, integrity issues among practitioners, and insufficient regulation [5] - A significant portion of family offices has been registered but subsequently deregistered, indicating instability in the sector [4][5] Comparison with International Markets - The competition from Hong Kong and Singapore is intensifying, with both regions actively promoting their family office services [7][8] - The characteristics of family office promotion in these regions include top-level planning, focus on single family offices, long-term tax incentives, and government intervention [7][8] Recommendations for Improvement - Family offices in mainland China should focus on building a robust local foundation while actively expanding overseas, balancing client needs and service quality [2][8] - There is a need for family offices to adopt a comprehensive approach to wealth management, integrating both domestic and international asset allocation strategies [9][15] Wealth Transfer and Governance - The recent "Wahaha inheritance" incident highlights the necessity for companies to move away from "parent culture" and moral halos, emphasizing strategic planning and governance [2][9] - Effective wealth transfer requires a trust-based governance structure, especially for entrepreneurs from the 50s and 60s generations [9][10] Industry Standards and Practices - The family office sector is plagued by issues such as fraudulent practices, exaggerated claims, and the commodification of services [6][17] - A clear distinction between genuine family offices and those masquerading as such is essential for the industry's credibility [18][19] Future Directions - The evolution of family offices should align with the new productive forces in society, focusing on enhancing overall productivity and fostering entrepreneurial spirit [18][19] - The industry must prioritize high standards in talent acquisition and maintain a focus on family interests to ensure sustainable growth [19]

Core Viewpoint - The ongoing legal dispute within the Wahaha Group, following the death of its founder Zong Qinghou, highlights the challenges of wealth inheritance and succession in Chinese private enterprises, particularly involving family trusts and governance issues [2][11]. Group 1: Legal Dispute and Trust Issues - The lawsuit involves Zong Fuli and her three half-siblings, who are claiming a trust fund amounting to $2.1 billion and seeking to inherit Zong Fuli's 29.4% stake in Wahaha Group [2][4]. - The effectiveness of the family trust is under scrutiny, with questions about whether it was properly established and documented, especially in the context of cross-border assets [4][6]. - The original promise made by Zong Qinghou to not disadvantage his children is being challenged, as the legal framework in Hong Kong emphasizes the validity of written trust documents over oral promises [6][7]. Group 2: Governance and Succession Challenges - The report indicates that approximately 82% of Chinese family businesses lack a written family charter, relying instead on oral agreements, which complicates the establishment of family trusts [11]. - Effective governance requires a clear connection between the family's intentions and the legal structures supporting wealth transfer, emphasizing the need for a family charter that outlines succession and asset management [11][13]. - The transition from one generation to the next is fraught with difficulties, as the second generation often lacks the necessary experience and decision-making skills to navigate economic cycles [14]. Group 3: Reputation and Social Responsibility - Wahaha's current reputation crisis necessitates innovative solutions that focus on social responsibility and the dual aspects of family governance and business operations [3][12]. - The company is encouraged to shift public perception from sensational family disputes to meaningful contributions to society and business [12].

Core Viewpoint - The recent case of a family trust being "pierced" by a court in Jiangsu has caused significant upheaval in the trust industry, raising concerns about the legal treatment of trust assets and the execution process [2][4][6]. Group 1: Case Details - In the case (2023) Su 0602 Zhi 6286, the court executed assets amounting to 41.43 million yuan from a family trust belonging to Cui Yi, treating them as deposits [2][3]. - Cui Yi was sentenced to 14 years in prison for bribery and fraud, with a restitution obligation of 70.12 million yuan to China Resources Pharmaceutical Group [3][4]. - The court's actions included freezing multiple bank accounts and seizing real estate, leading to the execution of the family trust assets without a formal determination of the trust's validity [3][4]. Group 2: Legal Implications - The execution of trust assets raises questions about the independent nature of trust property, which should not be treated as the personal property of the grantor [4][8]. - The court's direct execution of trust assets without a thorough examination of the trust's validity or the circumstances surrounding its establishment is seen as a procedural flaw [6][18]. - The case highlights the need for a clear legal process to determine the validity of trusts, especially in complex cases involving multiple parties [4][17]. Group 3: Industry Concerns - The incident has sparked concerns within the trust industry regarding the potential for misuse of trusts for debt evasion and the implications for trust asset protection [12][20]. - There is a growing need for regulatory clarity and legal safeguards to ensure that family trusts can operate effectively without being undermined by judicial actions [19][20]. - The trust industry is at a critical juncture, as improper handling of trust assets could lead to a loss of confidence among potential clients, prompting them to seek asset protection solutions abroad [20].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the ongoing inheritance dispute involving the estate of Zong Qinghou, founder of Wahaha Group, focusing on the legal complexities surrounding the trust and the control of assets, particularly the HSBC accounts linked to Jian Hao Ventures Limited, which is controlled by Zong's daughter, Zong Fuli [1][4][6]. Group 1: Trust Structure and Legal Implications - The offshore trust structure typically serves as the top layer in cross-border inheritance frameworks, with the trust holding companies in BVI and potentially other jurisdictions [3]. - Zong Fuli's Jian Hao Ventures Limited is speculated to be a lower-tier company in this structure, with her serving as a director or controlling figure [3][6]. - The effectiveness of the trust established by Zong Qinghou is under scrutiny, particularly regarding its legal standing in the face of conflicting wills [6][17]. Group 2: Legal Proceedings and Court Decisions - The inheritance dispute is being litigated in both Hong Kong and Hangzhou, with the Hong Kong case focusing on the validity of a $2.1 billion family trust and the Hangzhou case addressing the inheritance of a 29.4% stake in Wahaha Group [9][12]. - The Hong Kong High Court has indicated it will delay its ruling until the Hangzhou court resolves key factual issues, including the familial relationship of the plaintiffs to Zong Qinghou [12][14]. - The Hong Kong court's decision is expected to be announced on August 1, 2025, with a brief hearing anticipated [11][19]. Group 3: Will Validity and Inheritance Rights - The validity of Zong Qinghou's 2020 will, which states that "overseas assets are inherited by the only daughter," is contested due to potential conflicts of interest among the witnesses [17][18]. - If there are other heirs, such as underage children, the will may be partially invalidated as it must reserve a necessary share for them according to civil law [18][19]. - The legal requirements for the will's validity, including witness conditions, are discussed, highlighting the complexities of inheritance law in both Hong Kong and mainland China [17][18].

"14岁开始隐忍，20开始布局，40岁开始反杀"，最近全网都在追更这部大女主商战爽文。 娃哈哈集团董事长、"2024年胡润百富榜中国女首富"宗馥莉，就是这个大女主。 最初，人们以为宗馥莉是"江浙沪独女"的典型样本：杭州出生、美国留学，是家里一路当继承人培养的掌上明珠，不被催婚催生，享受充分的"搞事业"自 由。直到前几天，大家才知道，敢情她不是独女。 "私生子争家产"的豪门八卦一朝曝光，宗馥莉本就别具一格的继承故事添上了更浓重的传奇色彩——"她一步步走到今天，原来不是被托举上来的，而是 自己隐忍筹谋挣出来的。" 图源：小红书@小白鱼 "布鞋首富"宗庆后据传为非婚生子女准备的信托大礼包，也激起了广大网友对金融知识的学习热情。 信托是啥？怎么个托法？富豪们为了把钱留在自己家，都有哪些fancy的招数？我们找专业人士聊了聊。 01 地道江浙沪千金，用不着重生 也要夺回属于自己的一切？ 现实版"继承之战"风起云涌，每天都有新鲜的豪门故事会素材热辣出炉。今天宗馥莉的叔叔宗泽后接受媒体采访时直言宗馥莉"从小就很自私，六亲不 认"；明天宗庆后被爆料孩子不止宗馥莉一个，其实有7个；后天宗泽后再度向媒体"打假"称没有7个，就4个 ...