The family of a murder victim tried to sue his killer’s family. Here’s how it went

A person enters The Law Courts building, which is home to B.C. Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal, in Vancouver, on Monday, January 12, 2026. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Ethan Cairns

VANCOUVER — The B.C. Supreme Court has dismissed a lawsuit filed by the family of a man murdered in a “contract killing” in 2017 in China, against the family of the killer who they say used the victim’s funds to buy homes in Metro Vancouver.

Justice Gordon Funt’s ruling says the case was both “extraordinary,” involving a lead defendant who was executed in China in 2020, and “ordinary,” for hinging on the burden of proof.

The lawsuit was filed in 2018 by the family of Changbin Yang against Long Ni, who was in Vancouver at the time of the killing but would later be arrested and executed in China for having ordered the murder.

The lawsuit named Ni, his wife and daughter as defendants, alleging he borrowed the equivalent of $113 million from Yang to invest in the Chinese mining industry, but instead used it to buy several B.C. properties.

Wednesday’s court decision says the plaintiffs failed to provide sufficient evidence the properties were bought with the loan funds, or that Ni “fraudulently misrepresented” how he intended to use the money.

The judge also found the plaintiffs misled multiple judges in China that had dealt with the division of Yang’s estate, while also finding Ni’s wife had misled a judge in B.C. about her own financial position.

“This action is ordinary in that its resolution turns primarily on a plaintiff’s burden of proof, which is based on a balance of probabilities,” the ruling says.

The plaintiffs had sought a total of $168 million in the lawsuit for family compensation after the murder, claiming Yang “was the wealthiest businessman in Yichang City” with interests in coal mine and a hotel.

“However, the plaintiffs did not provide any financial information, such as financial statements, for either the hotel, the coal mine, or any other business undertaken by Mr. Yang. There was no explanation for the plaintiffs’ failure to present such evidence,” Funt’s ruling says.

The ruling details various debt claims that were ultimately dismissed, and also Chinese court proceedings involving the division of the estate of Yang, who died without a will.

The judge found that “any estate division agreement served to mislead the Chinese courts.”

“As may be seen, the plaintiffs may have misled at least six Chinese judges in a multimillion RMB enforcement proceeding (approximately $74 million),” the ruling says. “I am left with the disquiet that there are undisclosed material facts. Am I the seventh judge the plaintiffs wish to mislead?”

The ruling says the plaintiffs also wanted a Chinese court judgment enforced in Canada against Ni’s estate, but the judge refused to recognize it because China lacks “judicial independence.”

“I can take judicial notice that China is a large, vibrant country with a long, well-documented history that is now and has been governed under a one-party system for over 70 years by the Communist Party of China,” Funt wrote.

“Conceptually, I have difficulty comprehending the existence of an independent judiciary where there is one-party rule.”

Funt dismissed the case, finding the plaintiffs hadn’t met their burden of proof on the various debt claims, which lacked documentation of loans involving Ni and Yang, who were once friends and were both “seasoned” businessmen.

“As a seasoned businessman, it is highly improbable that Mr. Yang was nonchalant with respect to an unsecured personal loan of approximately $105 million,” the judge wrote.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published March 26, 2026.

Darryl Greer, The Canadian Press