Chen Xiaoying, long celebrated in Chinese business media as the country’s “express queen,” and her company STO Express have been drawn into a courtroom drama initiated by her ex‑husband, Xi Chunyang. Xi has filed a civil suit at Yuhuan People’s Court seeking confirmation of shareholder rights over roughly 20.28 million STO shares — about 1.33% of the listed company and valued at around RMB 280 million (approximately $39 million) at the closing price on January 21.
Xi says the contested shares are half of a block of roughly 40.57 million shares that, he claims, the couple agreed in 2012 would be treated as jointly allotted marital property at the time of their divorce. His petition asks the court to order a non‑trading transfer of the disputed shares from Chen’s name to his, a legal remedy that would change the formal register without a market sale.
STO Express has acknowledged receipt of the suit in a regulatory filing and said the case concerns a private divorce‑property dispute; the company emphasized the litigation should not materially affect operations, internal governance or the actual control structure while the matter remains unadjudicated. Yuhuan court has accepted the case but it has not yet proceeded to trial, leaving the outcome and any share‑register changes uncertain.
The affair matters because STO is effectively a family‑controlled business. The company’s actual controllers are siblings Chen Dejun and Chen Xiaoying; together they hold 35.84% of the company. Chen directly holds about 40.59 million shares (2.65% of the company) and additional indirect stakes, while her brother serves as chairman and has stewarded the business through a period of steady growth.
The legal claim revives a long, fractious history. STO’s early years were turbulent: the company grew from a small regional player in the 1990s into one of China’s largest couriers as its founders and early colleagues splintered off to create rival firms. Chen and her brother consolidated control after the premature death in 1998 of one of STO’s co‑founders, and the business later listed via a backdoor in 2016.
Xi’s own trajectory is intertwined with the sector’s consolidation and shakeouts. A former aide and driver to the founding family, he briefly held senior roles at STO before parting ways and in 2012 becoming chairman and CEO of TianTian Express, which he and Chen acquired when it was loss‑making. He later sold TianTian to Suning in 2017 for RMB 4.25 billion (about $590 million), a lucrative exit that removed him from STO’s day‑to‑day affairs.
The legal skirmish comes against a backdrop of improving top‑line performance for STO but persistent structural pressures in China’s courier market. The company has reported healthy volume growth — parcel throughput rose from about 51.1 billion items in 2018 to 227.3 billion in 2024 — but single‑ticket revenues have fallen sharply, from roughly RMB 3.33 in 2018 to RMB 2.05 in 2024, compressing margins. STO’s most recent filings show revenue growth and recovering single‑ticket pricing after industry‑wide measures to restrain cut‑price competition, but they also flag a high asset‑liability ratio (63.1%) and weak short‑term liquidity metrics (current ratio 0.67, quick ratio 0.37).
For investors and corporate governance watchers the immediate monetary stakes are modest relative to STO’s market capitalization and the Chen siblings’ controlling block. But the dispute illuminates a recurrent risk in China’s family‑run listed companies: private wealth disputes can spill onto public registers, creating legal uncertainty, management distraction and reputational friction. If the court were to order a transfer, the change would be narrow in percentage terms but could signal that past informal or family agreements are open to later challenge.
Looking ahead, the case will be watched for its legal reasoning and any precedent it might set about how Chinese courts treat divorce‑era agreements that later generate listed‑company equity through restructuring or IPOs. STO has downplayed operational impact, but investors should monitor regulatory filings, any injunctions affecting share transfers and whether the suit emboldens other dormant claims against founders of family‑controlled firms across China’s listed universe.