The father of champion swimmer Katie Lau King-ting fabricated legal documents to win control of HK$270 million in family assets from his ex-wife, a Court of First Instance judge ruled yesterday. Mr Justice Anselmo Reyes rejected suggestions that the swimmer's mother, Stella Cheng Miu-har, had reneged on a promise to give two-thirds of the assets to Katie, 29, and her younger brother. Instead, Edmund Lau Pak-chai persuaded his daughter to sue her mother based on a bogus share deed that purported to leave the siblings money, the judge said. 'Edmund forged the share deed,' Mr Justice Reyes wrote in his 35-page ruling. 'Even if one gives Edmund the benefit of the doubt and assumes that he acted out of love for his children, that would not excuse his conduct.' Katie Lau won a silver medal in the 4x100m freestyle relay at the 1994 Asian Games. Mr Justice Reyes ordered Mr Lau to pay his ex-wife's legal costs and HK$5 million in damages for holding up the sale of a HK$130 million property on Canton Road. The judge said he was appalled by Mr Lau's conduct and ruled that he must vacate the family's flat. There was no evidence that Katie Lau had known the share deed was faked, Mr Justice Reyes added. Ms Cheng had argued that her ex-husband used his daughter to get at the assets, which he had signed over to her years earlier. Mr Lau and Ms Cheng were once partners in a city law firm. A key issue was the share deed's age. The document was examined by forensic experts for both sides. Mr Justice Reyes rejected conclusions from Mr Lau's expert that the deed was more than two years old. His methodology was not generally accepted in the forensic community, the judge added. 'An 'educated guess' remains a 'guess',' the ruling said. 'I cannot accept his conclusion with any reasonable degree of confidence.' The document's age was relevant because Mr Lau had testified at trial last month that his ex-wife had agreed to the asset transfer agreement almost eight years ago. Ms Cheng denied that claim. There was little evidence that Ms Cheng would have had the time or skill necessary to forge a related document - and fake her ex-husband's handwriting - to discredit the share deed, Mr Justice Reyes said. 'The whole enterprise, while not impossible, would have required an extraordinary combination of prescience, ingenuity and nerves that few possess,' he wrote. Mr Lau never mentioned the deed in correspondence with his ex-wife until the eleventh hour, even as the pair was embroiled in a nasty fight for control of the family assets, which included 11 properties, the ruling said. 'It would have been the simplest thing in the world to produce the share deed at the earliest stage of correspondence in order conclusively to refute Stella's claim to sole beneficial ownership,' the ruling said. 'But Edmund did not do this. One wonders why not.'