A prosecutor in the trial of Peter Chan Chun-chuen, accused of forging a will to claim the estate of a billionaire tycoon, has criticised the former feng shui master for changing the focus of his appeal by accusing his late lawyer of incompetence. Barrister David Perry QC told the Court of Appeal yesterday that Chan had made no such complaint against barrister Andrew Kan, who died last month, when he originally filed an appeal against his conviction and 12-year sentence in July 2013 for forging and using a fake will to claim tycoon Nina Wang Kung Yu-sum's HK$83 billion estate. Perry said he was not informed that such grounds for appeal would be added until he first heard of Chan's legal team complaining how Kan had failed to address Wang's probate hearing in 2009 with the original trial judge. They claimed this affected Chan's chances to have a fair trial at the appeal hearing last week . "The prosecution case was strong and [the defence losing] was not the fault of Mr Kan," he said. Perry claimed Chan told the appeal hearing he had rejected a HK$15.7 billion settlement fee, arguing that if he was guilty of the forgery, he would accept this sum. However, documents from the probate case initially showed Chan was willing to accept HK$5 billion to settle in 2009, until a dispute over the inclusion of settlement fees scuppered it. Perry said Kan had presented the defence case as best he could. He avoided calling some witnesses whom he believed would support the prosecution's case and his presentation helped cut the trial from 60 days to 30. The judge reduced Chan's sentence by two years on account of this, Perry added. Chan's lawyer James Wood QC rejected the prosecution's allegation, saying Chan's legal team had always had "much love and respect" for Kan.