…
For years, a common misconception has been that transferring funds to overseas jurisdictions might provide a safe harbour against domestic regulatory enforcement. A recent, unprecedented move by the Securities and Futures Commission (SFC) has emphatically shattered this illusion.
In a stark warning to individuals attempting to evade the regulatory perimeter, the SFC has successfully obtained a first-of-its-kind interim injunction from the English courts to freeze assets located in England and Wales, running parallel to a worldwide Mareva injunction obtained in Hong Kong.
This development signals a paradigm shift in the SFC’s enforcement strategy. Geographical borders are now less of a barrier to the SFC’s pursuit of enforcement actions.
Background: The Alleged “Home-Grown” Insider Dealing
On 12 February 2026, the SFC obtained a worldwide interim injunction order (the “HK Order”) from the Court of First Instance of Hong Kong under section 213 of the Securities and Futures Ordinance (SFO). The legal proceedings target Mr. Chan Ching Wa (“Mr. Chan”), a former Assistant Vice President of the Listing Regulation and Enforcement Department at Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing Limited (HKEx), and two of his extended relatives, Mr. Lam Cho Man (“Mr. Lam”) and Mr. Chau Chi Kwong (“Mr. Chau”).
The SFC alleges that between June 2020 and March 2025, Mr. Chan abused his position to access confidential, price-sensitive information regarding at least 24 Hong Kong-listed companies prior to their public announcements. These companies notably include names such as SOHO China Limited, Ping An Healthcare and Technology Company Limited, and Lifestyle International Holdings Limited.
According to the SFC, Mr. Chan conducted insider dealing by trading the shares through securities accounts held by his relatives. He allegedly procured Mr. Lam to trade on his behalf. Mr. Lam also allegedly disclosed the insider information from Mr. Chan to Mr. Chau, who executed further trades. This is a classic, albeit easily traceable, method of evasion.
A First-of-its-Kind Cross-Border Injunction
While the alleged misconduct represents a serious breach of trust by an insider with “god’s-eye view” access to listing documents, the true watershed moment of this case lies in the SFC’s asset recovery strategy.
Because the three suspects had left Hong Kong and transferred their assets overseas, the SFC did not stop at securing the HK Order in Hong Kong. In a pioneering legal manoeuvre, the regulator commenced proceedings in England and Wales, successfully obtaining an interim injunction order (the “UK Order”) from the High Court of Justice Business and Property Courts, freezing the assets of Mr. Chan and Mr. Chau in England and Wales.
The HK Order and the UK Order prohibit the suspects from disposing of or diminishing the value of their assets both in Hong Kong and overseas (including England and Wales), up to a total value of approximately HK$4.3 million (HK$3,709,566 for Mr. Chan and Mr. Lam; HK$604,545 for Mr. Chau).
The SFC’s announcement can be viewed here.
The Cost-Benefit Analysis: A Resolute Statement of Intent
From a purely commercial perspective, the economics of this enforcement action are striking. Market observers and legal practitioners are keenly aware that the costs associated with instructing foreign counsel and commencing complex cross-border litigation in the English High Court may rival—if not eclipse—the HK$4.3 million currently frozen.ss
Why, then, would the SFC expend such significant resources for a relatively modest recovery?
This action is likely a strategic move designed to establish a powerful deterrent. By demonstrating its willingness to absorb exorbitant legal costs to pursue wrongdoers across common law jurisdictions, the SFC is establishing a firm precedent. The objective is to dismantle the psychological “firewall” relied upon by individuals who believe that relocating themselves or their wealth to popular destination countries like the UK immunizes them from Hong Kong’s regulatory reach.
Furthermore, this high-profile action serves to reinforce the integrity of Hong Kong’s financial markets, demonstrating that the regulator will decisively conduct “spring cleaning” and hold insiders, especially former HKEx officers with their extensive access to price-sensitive information, accountable to the highest standards.
Implications for Market Participants
The SFC’s successful deployment of cross-border judicial assistance carries profound implications:
- Global reach of Section 213: The SFC has proven its ability to weaponize section 213 of the SFO beyond domestic borders, leveraging international judicial frameworks to lock down assets globally.
- Vulnerability of offshore wealth: Wealth migrated overseas is no longer beyond the grasp of Hong Kong regulators. The English courts’ willingness to side with the SFC indicates that other common law jurisdictions may adopt similar collaborative stances.
- Effective surveillance capabilities: The SFC’s detection of trading anomalies, even when obscured through the accounts of extended family members (in this case, in-laws), highlights the sophistication of the regulator’s data analytics and market surveillance systems.
How Stevenson, Wong & Co. Can Help
The regulatory landscape is becoming increasingly borderless and aggressively policed. In this environment, relying on geographical distance or jurisdictional separation for protection is a flawed strategy.
Whether you are a licensed corporation, an executive, or an individual with multi-jurisdictional assets, proactive compliance and immediate legal counsel during the initial stages of any regulatory inquiry are critical.
Our regulatory and compliance team at Stevenson, Wong & Co. possesses extensive experience in dealing with complex SFC investigations, sections 213 and 214 proceedings. We routinely advise clients on:
- Responding to SFC statutory notices and investigations.
- Navigating the complexities of domestic and worldwide injunctions and other orders.
- Assessing, drafting and reinforcing internal compliance protocols to mitigate the risks of insider dealing and market misconduct.
To discuss how we can assist you, please contact our Ms. Rainbow Ip, Mr. Kenneth Leung or Mr. Ronnie Tse.
This article is for information purposes only. Its content does not constitute legal advice and should not be treated as such. Stevenson, Wong & Co. will not be liable to you in respect of any special, indirect or consequential loss or damage arising from or in connection with any decision made, action or inaction taken in reliance on the information set out herein.