��һ�ǿ�����

• Xinfeng (Lily) Li was ordered to pay over $100,000 in indemnity costs after manipulating a will.

• The High Court found Li unduly influenced Frank Lane’s will, which left her a $500,000 bequest.

• Justice Peter Churchman declared the will invalid, citing Lane’s lack of capacity and undue influence.

A former lover who  to receive a $500,000 bequest has been ordered to pay indemnity costs of more than $100,000 after a judge found her case was “hopeless” and “bound to fail”.

Frank Lane, 78, died in May 2023 from . The High Court heard he fathered six children to three different partners.

He also had a “sexual relationship” with Xinfeng (Lily) Li — a much younger and longstanding friend, described in court as having worked in the  — a claim she denies.

On April 8, 2023, Lane was filmed in his hospital bed signing a will setting out the .

The will was prepared by , who has not held a practising certificate since it expired in 2018.

He has now been charged with providing legal services while describing himself as a lawyer. Young is defending the charge.

The High Court decision, handed down in December by Justice Peter Churchman, slated Young’s role in creating the will, which has now been declared invalid due to Lane lacking “testamentary capacity” when it was signed and being subject to undue influence.

Justice Churchman found Lily had manipulated Lane as the confused and barely conscious man lay gravely ill by intervening in the will preparation — all of which was caught on video.

The court heard Lane had prepared an earlier will in 2010 that split his estate equally among five of his six children.

Frank Lane signing a will in his hospital bed prepared by ex lawyerJinyue (Paul) Young. The will has subsequently been ruled invalid.

As Lane’s health deteriorated, it was decided that a new will would be drafted. Lily arranged for Young to prepare the new will in 2023, the day before the will was signed.

After Lane’s death, his son James filed an application for the new will to be ruled invalid, which was opposed by Lily. The case went to trial last year.

The damning findings found firmly in favour of James, stripping Lily of the $500,000 but reserving a decision on costs.

Now, a just-released decision has awarded indemnity costs against Lily — a rare step only made in cases when a litigant is found to have acted “vexatiously, frivolously, improperly or unnecessarily”, the decision says.

Lily Li has been ordered to pay more than $100,000 in indemnity costs after a High Court judge stripped her of a $500,000 bequest from her former lover. Photo / Dean Purcell

Lily had argued Lane was of sound mind when he left her the huge bequest and that the 2023 will should stand. She pleaded “impecuniosity”, telling the court she had no money and should not have to pay any costs.

However, Evolution Lawyers director Thomas Bloy, who acted for James, argued that Lily should pay full indemnity costs as her case “lacked merit” and had resoundingly failed at trial.

The judge said Lily had “strongly held views” that Lane’s 2023 will was an “accurate reflection” of his intentions.

But her submissions relating to costs totally ignored the finding that she had manipulated the will process, focusing instead on claims Lane had necessary capacity when he signed the document.

“The finding of undue influence is also one which cannot be ignored by Lily,” Justice Churchman wrote.

“The evidence in support of that conclusion was overwhelming.”

The decision says Lily was not only present during the will’s preparation, “she actively intervened in the process including making suggestions as to what should or should not be in the will”.

Lily Li is appealing the High Court decision, arguing the judge was wrong to invalidate Frank Lane's 2023 will. Photo / Dean Purcell

Justice Churchman said it was also clear that Young was acting for Lily, not Lane.

It was obvious the case needed a “skilled and experienced legal practitioner” who could confirm Lane’s capacity and prevent anyone exerting undue influence on the deceased.

“Mr Young did neither.”

Justice Churchman said indemnity costs may only be awarded in a “hopeless case”.

“The concept of ‘hopeless’ in this context is equated with ‘totally without merit’ and ‘bound to fail’.

“On the facts that I have found existed in this case, Lily’s argument that there was no undue influence was a ‘hopeless’ position that was ‘bound to fail’.”

Indemnity costs were awarded. The applicant is seeking nearly $150,000 but the exact quantum will be confirmed by the court.

Lily’s lawyer has now filed an appeal against the December judgment overturning the will.

Documents obtained by the Herald show she claims the judgment wrongly found the 2023 will was “not rational” and placed too much weight on “hearsay evidence” of hospital staff about Lane’s condition.

She also claims the court relied on “inaccurate” transcripts of the video recording and failed to take account of previous statements by Lane about wanting to “take care” of Lily.

Young previously told the Herald he was certain Lane had a “clear mind” at the time the will was drafted.

He denied describing himself as a lawyer or providing legal services, and claimed the prosecution against him was a “malicious attack” by the Law Society.

Lane Nichols is Deputy Head of ��һ�ǿ����� and a senior journalist for the New Zealand Herald with more than 20 years experience in the industry.