Karas So LLP is a Hong Kong law firm specialising in commercial litigation, dispute resolution, restructuring and insolvency, and private wealth disputes. The firm operates in association with the British law firm Mishcon de Reya.
The firm traces its origins to the Hong Kong practice of Lipman Karas, an Australian-founded litigation firm. It began operating as Karas LLP in 2021 and adopted its present name in February 2023, following the admission of Kevin So as a partner.
The firm has acted for the liquidators of China Evergrande Group, including in investigations and litigation concerning the property developer's former auditors and professional advisers.
History
Origins
The firm's origins can be traced to Lipman Karas, a litigation practice established in Adelaide, Australia, in 2004 by Jason Karas and Scipio John Lipman. The firm subsequently expanded internationally, including into Hong Kong and London.
In 2009, Karas established a local Hong Kong solicitors' practice, Karas Lawyers, alongside a foreign-law branch of Lipman Karas. The practices shared premises, profits and administrative functions before merging in 2012 to operate as an integrated Hong Kong branch of Lipman Karas.
By 2019, the relationship between the two founders had deteriorated amid disagreements concerning the management and proposed restructuring of their practice. The founders subsequently negotiated a separation of their business interests.
Following the separation, Karas continued the Hong Kong practice under the name Karas LLP. The Law Society of Hong Kong records 1 July 2021 as the commencement date of the limited liability partnership.
Association with Mishcon de Reya
On 1 November 2021, Mishcon de Reya announced the commencement of its association with Karas LLP, having received regulatory approval to establish an associated Hong Kong presence earlier that year. The arrangement expanded the British firm's international practice in Asia, alongside its Singapore office.
In January 2022, Hong Kong litigator Kevin So joined Karas LLP as a partner, together with a team of four lawyers specialising in private wealth, trusts and contentious succession matters.
On 2 February 2023, the firm changed its name to Karas So LLP. The name change recognised So's contribution to the firm's development and reflected its expansion into private wealth disputes and related practices.
Practice
Karas So LLP focuses on complex commercial disputes, cross-border insolvency litigation, asset recovery, professional negligence, shareholder disputes and regulatory investigations. Its private wealth practice includes contentious probate, trusts and succession disputes.
In the 2026 Chambers Greater China Region guide, the firm was ranked Band 3 for restructuring and insolvency and Band 4 for dispute resolution litigation among international firms. Jason Karas, Kevin So and Alex Wong were individually recognised in its dispute resolution rankings.
China Evergrande liquidation
In March 2024, Karas So was appointed alongside Clifford Chance and Tanner De Witt to advise the court-appointed liquidators of China Evergrande Group. The appointments followed a winding-up order made by the High Court of Hong Kong in January 2024.
The firm worked with liquidators Tiffany Wong and Eddie Middleton of Alvarez & Marsal. In June 2024, Reuters reported that Karas So was investigating whether claims could be brought against Evergrande's former auditor, PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), and other professional advisers to recover losses for creditors.
In August 2026, the High Court of Hong Kong dismissed an application by PricewaterhouseCoopers International Limited to strike out proceedings brought by Evergrande against it. The action concerned allegations relating to the auditing and oversight of Evergrande's financial statements. The decision permitted the claim against PwC International to proceed, without determining its substantive liability.
In China Evergrande Group (in Liquidation) v PricewaterhouseCoopers (A Firm) and Others [2026] HKCFI 4845, Karas So instructed Adrian Beltrami KC, Charles Manzoni SC and Cherry Xu to represent Evergrande.
Litigation involving the former partners
The separation of the original Lipman Karas practice gave rise to litigation in the Federal Court of Australia concerning the ownership of the Hong Kong practice and negotiations between Jason Karas and Mishcon de Reya.
In LK Law Pty Ltd v Karas (No 4) [2025] FCA 1461, the Federal Court found that Karas had breached fiduciary duties owed to his former business partner Scipio John Lipman and their jointly established practice. The court found that Karas had entered into undisclosed negotiations with Mishcon de Reya concerning the acquisition of the Hong Kong practice, had disclosed confidential business information and had failed to disclose the arrangements before the execution of a separation agreement in May 2021.
The court also found that Mishcon de Reya had knowingly assisted in the breaches of fiduciary duty. The firm announced its intention to appeal the judgment.
The proceedings attracted coverage in the legal press partly because of the circumstances in which Lipman became aware of the arrangement. According to reporting by RollOnFriday and Lawyers Weekly, a delivery of cupcakes accompanied by a congratulatory note referring to the new association arrived at the Hong Kong office in September 2021, alerting Lipman to the previously undisclosed relationship.
In LK Law Pty Ltd v Karas (No 5) [2026] FCA 129, judgment was entered against Karas for A$36,458,048.44, including interest, and against Mishcon de Reya for A$21,399,540.24, including interest. The claims against Karas LLP, which had been separately named as a respondent, were dismissed.
Following applications concerning enforcement of the judgments, the Federal Court granted a stay of enforcement against Karas pending appeal in June 2026. In Karas v LK Law Pty Ltd (Stay of judgment) [2026] FCA 807, the court accepted undertakings restricting dealings with specified assets in place of previously imposed requirements for a cash payment and bank guarantee. It considered the latter conditions disproportionate, given their potential effect on Karas' financial position and ability to pursue an appeal.
