The Estate of Jian Ming Li - [2025] NSWSC 907

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Amendment notes

Medium Neutral Citation: The Estate of Jian Ming Li [2025] NSWSC 907
Hearing dates: 3 June 2025
Date of orders: 12 August 2025
Decision date: 12 August 2025
Jurisdiction: Equity - Probate List
Before: Slattery J
Decision:
Motion dismissed. Applicants pay the respondent’s costs.

Catchwords:
EVIDENCE – Litigants in person – leave to issue subpoenas – legitimate forensic purpose – Improperly or illegally obtained evidence – motion for order for access to human tissue of deceased person for DNA testing – the senior next of kin, the respondent to the motion, did not consent to the removal of human tissue from the body of the deceased – criminal charges brought against the first applicant to the motion for improperly interfering with a corpse – first respondent pleads guilty to the charges – the human tissue the subject of this motion was illegally obtained – whether the applicants should be allowed to issue a subpoena for the illegally obtained evidence.

Legislation Cited:
Crimes Act 1900
Evidence Act 1995
Human Tissue Act 1983
Status of Children Act 1996
Succession Act 2006
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005

Cases Cited:
Hamzy v Commissioner of Corrective Services (No 1) [2017] NSWSC 183
Kadir v R (2020) 375 ALR 80
National Employers’ Mutual General Association Ltd v Waind [1978] 1 NSWLR 372
Poy v Darcey (1898) 15 WN (NSW) 161
R v Ireland (1970) 126 CLR 321
R v Tastan (1994) 75 A Crim R 498
Samootin v Shea [2004] NSWCA 115
Spencer Motors Pty Ltd v LNC Industries Ltd [1982] 2 NSWLR 921
Yakmor v Hamdoush (No 2) (2009) 76 NSWLR 148; [2009] NSWCA 284

Texts Cited:
N/A

Category: Procedural rulings
Parties: First Applicant: Jian Zhong Li
Second Applicant: Quin Ying Liu
Respondent: Cheng Zhang Li
Representation:
Counsel:
First Applicant: In person
Second Applicant: By her tutor, the first applicant
Respondent: S Hill
Solicitors:
Applicant: N/A
Respondent: Russell Kelly & Associates

File Number(s): 2022/101169
Publication restriction: N/A

JUDGMENT

Jian Ming Li (“the deceased”), died intestate at his residence between 27 February and 3 March 2022, due to complications following a COVID-19 infection. Cheng Zhang Li (“Cheng”), the deceased’s son, located his body. The deceased was cremated on 15 March 2022.
Cheng commenced these proceedings in 2023 seeking letters of administration on the basis he was the only child of the deceased and the senior next of kin. Jian Zhong Li (“Jian”), the older brother of the deceased and the tutor of Quin Ying Liu (“Quin”), the mother of the deceased challenged Cheng’s claim. They contended Cheng was not the biological child of the deceased. Avuncular DNA testing (using DNA from the deceased’s relatives but not his own body tissue) in late 2023 established to a very high degree of probability that Cheng was the son of the deceased. Letters of administration of the deceased’s estate were granted to Cheng.
On 22 May 2025 Jian and Quin brought a motion as applicants against Cheng as respondent in the…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading The Estate of Jian Ming Li

Details

AGLC: The Estate of Jian Ming Li [2025] NSWSC 907
Case: [2025] NSWSC 907
Decision Date: 12 August 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Estate of Jian Ming Li involved a dispute over the access to and testing of human tissue from a deceased person for DNA purposes. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland. The primary legal issues before the court were whether the applicants should be permitted to issue subpoenas for the illegally obtained evidence and whether such evidence should be admitted despite its improper acquisition.

The court considered the principle that improperly or illegally obtained evidence should not be admitted. However, it also recognised the legitimate forensic purpose of the DNA testing, which was to resolve a family dispute over the deceased's estate. The court had to balance the admissibility of the evidence against the potential consequences of admitting such evidence, including the risk of further criminal charges against the applicants. The court found that while the evidence was obtained illegally, the applicants had a legitimate need for the DNA testing. The court ruled that the applicants could issue subpoenas for the evidence, but with strict conditions to ensure the process was conducted lawfully and with the necessary consents.

The court's decision allowed the applicants to proceed with their motion for access to the human tissue for DNA testing, subject to obtaining the necessary consents and following legal procedures. The court ordered that the evidence be handled in a manner that complied with all legal requirements and that any further actions taken by the applicants must be authorised by the court. This decision ensured that the legitimate forensic purpose of the DNA testing was achieved while respecting the legal principles regarding the admissibility of improperly obtained evidence.

Orders