Tao v. Yin
Junjie Tao, Executor of the Estate of Tong Zhang aka Tony Zhang, Deceased
Law Firm / Organization
Harper Grey LLP
Hang Yin
Law Firm / Organization
Bennett Jones LLP
Lawyer(s)

Mia Laity

Yan Chun Yin
Law Firm / Organization
Bennett Jones LLP
Lawyer(s)

Mia Laity

1011066 B.C. Ltd.
Law Firm / Organization
Bennett Jones LLP
Lawyer(s)

Mia Laity

1079770 B.C. Ltd.
Law Firm / Organization
Bennett Jones LLP
Lawyer(s)

Mia Laity

1032734 B.C. Ltd.
Law Firm / Organization
Bennett Jones LLP
Lawyer(s)

Mia Laity

1085842 B.C. Ltd.
Law Firm / Organization
Bennett Jones LLP
Lawyer(s)

Mia Laity

Nature of the Claim:
Junjie Tao, as executor of Tong Zhang’s estate, alleged that Hang Yin misappropriated funds between 2015 and 2018 through a scheme involving corporate entities controlled by Yin and his family. The defendants argued that the funds were part of an investment from Zhang’s father and claimed an oral agreement to divide assets terminated the business relationship in 2018.

Key Legal Issues:

  1. Did the defendants comply with court orders requiring production of financial documents regarding the Buxton and Surrey properties?
  2. Were the defendants in contempt of court for failing to produce mortgage statements and rental income information as required by prior orders?

Findings and Decision:
The court found the defendants in contempt for breaching clear provisions of the court's order. Specifically:

  • The defendants failed to provide the Buxton Property mortgage statement promptly, only disclosing it nine months after the order.
  • The Surrey Property mortgage statement was provided three months late without sufficient justification.

The defendants’ failure to act promptly and thoroughly undermined compliance with the orders. However, no contempt finding was made for missing rental income documentation due to unclear order language.

Costs and Outcome:
The court declared contempt and reserved decisions on sanctions and costs. No monetary award was finalized, but the plaintiff sought special costs for the contempt application and alternative service application. Parties were directed to schedule further proceedings on costs and sanctions.

Supreme Court of British Columbia
S2010412
Civil litigation
Plaintiff