Kopi Luwak Holdings denies authorising reported ten-year franchise agreement; subsidiary reports matter to police

Kopi Luwak Holdings (01869.HK) issued a clarification announcement on 29 October 2026, denying that it had authorised or approved an alleged ten-year franchise agreement. The matter concerns the use of a subsidiary’s electronic signature and company seal, offering a reminder to those considering franchises in Hong Kong to verify contractual authority.

RMB 200 million fee and 1,000-store plan remain unconfirmed claims

According to New TimeSpace, citing an announcement disclosed through the Hong Kong Stock Exchange, the company became aware of media reports and online articles in mid-July claiming that its wholly owned subsidiary, Jiangsu Maoyou Holdings Co., Ltd., had entered into a ten-year franchise agreement with Guangzhou Maoshi Coffee Chain Co., Ltd. The alleged agreement involved RMB 200 million in brand licensing fees and plans to open 1,000 franchised outlets across China.

The fee, term and store count are all claims addressed in the company’s clarification, not a franchise expansion programme confirmed by the company. The company said the reports could mislead shareholders, investors and the public, and adversely affect its reputation.

Company denies authorising negotiations or contract approval

The announcement stated that, following verification, neither the company nor its subsidiary had authorised, approved or arranged any commercial negotiations, investment projects, franchise expansion plans or contract approval procedures relating to the transactions described in the alleged agreement.

The company also said that the electronic signature or seal on the alleged agreement had not been used in accordance with the group’s internal control procedures and authorisation requirements, nor had its use been formally authorised by the company or its subsidiary. The central issue is therefore not simply the number of proposed outlets, but whether the transactions and signing of the agreement had received formal approval.

Subsidiary reported the matter to Guangzhou police in July

The company said that, in view of the suspected unauthorised use of its subsidiary’s electronic signature or seal to purportedly execute an agreement and circulate related information, the subsidiary had reported the matter to the Haizhu District Branch of the Guangzhou Public Security Bureau on 30 July 2026.

The company said it would cooperate fully with the relevant authorities and reserved the right to take legal action against any person or entity responsible for unauthorised conduct or the dissemination of false or misleading information. The police report and reservation of legal rights should not be interpreted as evidence that a court has reached a ruling.

Verify signing authority before progressing franchise discussions

For those considering a franchise in Hong Kong, the practical lesson is to check the brand name, the contracting company and the actual authority granted as separate matters. Prospective franchisees should obtain written confirmation directly from the brand owner or licensing party, verifying the signatory’s authority, the scope of the authorisation and the entity receiving payment, rather than relying solely on a company seal, electronic signature or online reports of store openings.

Practical tip: before making a payment or committing to a shop lease, establish who has authorised the contract and who is responsible for fulfilling it. If the authorisation is disputed, seek independent legal advice first.