News
Find out all about our firm’s latest news and activities below. To learn more about any individual item, please contact us here.
19 Apr 2021
THE EXCHANGE PUBLISHED CONSULTATION PAPER ON LISTING REGIME FOR OVERSEAS ISSUERS
On 31 March 2021, The Stock Exchange of Hong Kong Limited (the “Exchange”) published a consultation paper (the “Consultation Paper”) on a proposed streamlined listing regime for overseas issuers. According to the Exchange, this is contextual to its Strategic Plan 2019-2021 announced in February 2019, which contained an initiative to continue to develop Hong Kong as a listing and capital raising hub for major global and regional companies on either a primary or secondary basis, thereby attracting global investments seeking exposure to Asia Pacific companies and Mainland investors seeking international exposure.
The Exchange considered the current regime is affected by issues such as complexity of requirements for overseas issuers, inconsistent shareholder protection standards for recognised jurisdictions and acceptable jurisdictions, co-existence of two secondary listing regimes and more restrictive secondary listing requirements for issuers with a centre of gravity in Greater China. In view of these and other issues set out in the Consultation paper, the Exchange set out its proposals, for comment, on amendments to the Listing Rules to streamline the existing regime for overseas issuers (including those with a centre of gravity in Greater China), and also make consequential amendments to the requirements for all issuers (including Hong Kong issuers and PRC issuers).
Summary of proposals
The proposals of the Exchange are at the following dimensions. Comparison is made with the existing regime for illustrative purpose. Capitalised terms shall have the same meaning as defined in the Consultation Paper.
|
Existing Regime |
Proposed Regime |
| 1. Recognised Jurisdictions and Acceptable Jurisdictions | |
|
a. Three “Recognised Jurisdictions” – Bermuda, the Cayman Islands and the PRC b. 28 “Acceptable Jurisdictions”, i.e. jurisdictions (other than Hong Kong, the Cayman Islands, Bermuda and the PRC) that the Exchange has accepted as an issuer’s place of incorporation eligible for listing in Hong Kong |
a. No more distinction between Recognised Jurisdictions and Acceptable Jurisdictions |
| 2. Shareholder protection standards | |
|
a. All issuers must comply with Appendix 3 to the Listing Rules b. Overseas Issuers incorporated in Recognised Jurisdictions must comply with the applicable part of Appendix 13 to the Listing Rules c. Overseas Issuers incorporated in Acceptable Jurisdictions must demonstrate they can comply with the Equivalence Requirement (i.e. the Listing Rules requirement that an Overseas Issuer must be incorporated or otherwise established in a jurisdiction where the standards of shareholder protection are at least equivalent to those provided in Hong Kong) by meeting the JPS Key Shareholder Protection Standards set out in the Country Guides d. However, “Grandfathered Greater China Issuers” (i.e. Greater China issuers primary listed on a Qualifying Exchange, namely, the New York Stock Exchange LLC, NASDAQ Stock Market or the Main Market of the London Stock Exchange plc (and belonging to the UK Financial Conduct Authority’s “Premium Listing” segment) on or before 15 December 2017) and Non-Greater China Issuers (i.e. issuers primary listed on a Qualifying Exchange, which are not issuers with centre of gravity in Greater China) are subject to another set of requirements in Chapter 19C |
a. The shareholder protection standards in Chapter 19C of and Appendices 3 and 13 to the Listing Rules and the JPS will be replaced by one common set of Core Standards applicable to all issuers to establish a baseline level of investor protection for all issuers regardless of their places of incorporation b.The Core Standards cover the most fundamental shareholders’ rights relating to the notice and conduct of shareholders’ meetings, approval of important matters, members’ right to requisition a meeting, remove directors, vote, speak and appoint proxies/corporate representatives, auditors, appointment of directors to fill casual vacancies and inspection of shareholders’ register, etc. which are based on standards set out in the HKCO or already required under the Listing Rules. c.The Equivalence Requirement will be repealed as a result |
| 3. Dual primary listings | |
|
a. Grandfathered Greater China Issuers with Non-compliant WVR and/ or VIE Structures cannot retain such structures while applying for dual primary listing directly, but may become dual primary listed on the Exchange with such structures if they secondary list in Hong Kong first, and subsequently there is significant demand for their shares such that the Trading Migration Requirement (i.e. the requirement under Listing Rule 19C.13 that if the majority of trading in Greater China Issuer’s listed shares migrates to the Exchange’s markets on a permanent basis, the Exchange will regard the issuer as having a dual primary listing and consequently the Automatic Waivers will no longer apply to such issuer) is triggered b. Common Waivers available to primary and dual-primary listed Overseas Issuers are set out in the JPS |
a. Grandfathered Greater China Issuers and Non-Greater China Issuers with non-compliant WVR and/ or VIE Structures may apply directly for a dual primary listing and retain the non-compliant structures, as long as they meet the eligibility and suitability requirements of Chapter 19C for Qualifying Issuers with a WVR structure b. Codification of some conditional Common Waivers for dual-primary listed issuers and the principles for granting Common Waivers |
| 4. Secondary listings | |
|
a. Two routes: the JPS (only available to Overseas Issuers that do not have a centre of gravity in Greater China) and Chapter 19C of the Listing Rules b. Common Waivers available to secondary listed Overseas Issuers are only set out in the JPS c. Automatic Waivers are (a) set out in the JPS for JPS Secondary Issuers; and (b) codified in Chapter 19C of the Listing Rules for issuers with, or seeking, a secondary listing under that chapter d. Greater China Issuers with or without a WVR structure must (i) demonstrate that they are “Innovative Companies”; and (ii) have a minimum market capitalisation at listing of HK$40 billion (or HK$10 billion with revenue of HK$1 billion in the most recent audited financial year) e. Only Greater China Issuers are subject to the Trading Migration Requirement f. JPS Automatic Waivers eligibility requirements: (i) Listing on a Recognised Stock Exchange (as set out in JPS); (ii) Five years’ good compliance record; (iii) Market capitalisation of US$400 million (approximately HK$3.1 billion) or more g. Listing Rules are silent on the application of Automatic Waivers for a secondary listed issuer that de-lists from the stock exchange on which it is primary listed h. Listing Rules are silent on whether a Grandfathered Greater China Issuer or a Non-Greater China Issuer can retain its Non-compliant WVR and/ or VIE Structures if it delists from the overseas exchange on which it was primary listed |
a. Codification and consolidation of requirements of the two routes to secondary listing b. Codification of all secondary listing related JPS provisions (including Common Waivers and Automatic Waivers for JPS Secondary Issuers) into Chapter 19C of the Listing Rules c. Non-WVR Greater China Issuers seeking a secondary listing (i) are no longer required to demonstrate that they are “Innovative Companies”; and (ii) have the option of meeting a minimum market capitalisation at listing of either HK$3 billion (with a track record of good regulatory compliance of at least five full financial years on a Qualifying Exchange or on any Recognised Stock Exchange, as the case may be) or HK$10 billion (with a track record of good regulatory compliance of at least two full financial years on a Qualifying Exchange) d. All secondary listed issuers are subject to the Trading Migration Requirement e. Codification of JPS Automatic Waiver eligibility requirements with minor modifications: (a) the compliance record requirement changed from “five years” to “five full financial years”; and (b) the minimum expected market capitalisation requirement changed from US$400 million to HK$3 billion f. An issuer will be regarded as having a primary listing on the Exchange upon its de-listing from the stock exchange on which it is primary listed. The issuer shall notify the Exchange in advance of any anticipated de-listing (voluntary or involuntary) from the stock exchange on which it is primary listed and, among other things, details of any proposed waivers or continued relief/ grace period for full compliance with any Listing Rules requirements (including the bases for requesting such waivers/ relief/ grace period) g. The Exchange may, on a case-by-case basis, exercise its discretion to grant a time-relief waiver, suspend trading of the issuer’s shares or impose other measures as it considers necessary for the protection of investors and the maintenance of an orderly market. The Exchange will issue relevant guidance. h. A Grandfathered Greater China Issuer or a Non-Greater China Issuer is allowed to retain its Non-compliant WVR and/ or VIE Structures (subsisting at the time of its secondary listing in Hong Kong) if it de-lists from the Qualifying Exchange on which it is primary listed |
Analysis and Takeaways
The Consultation Paper represents an attempt of the Exchange to unify the existing regimes relating to the application for dual primary and secondary listings of overseas issuers. As the Exchange observed, the market feedback was that the rules are “fragmented, complex and difficult to navigate”, and as a result, the complexity of these requirements may not be conducive to compliance.
The proposed changes are expected to enhance comprehensibility of the rules and the regulatory regime as a whole, resulting in higher regulatory certainty. It is expected that this may create incentives for overseas issuers which are already primary listed in other exchanges, to explore possibilities of applying for dual primary listing or secondary listing on the Exchange.
It should also be noted that the proposed changes have removed certain more restrictive requirements for issuers with a centre of gravity in Greater China. This may well encourage and facilitate further “homecoming” secondary listing attempts of these issuers.
Please contact our Partner Mr. Rodney Teoh for any enquiries or further information.
This newsletter 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.
14 Apr 2021
(中文) 香港《2021年仲裁 (修订) 条例》将于5月19日全面生效
(中文) 《修订条例》将于下月全面生效
香港《2021年仲裁 (修订) 条例》(下称「《修订条例》」) 将于下月，即2021年5月19日，全面生效。《修订条例》旨在实施由最高人民法院与香港特区政府订立的《关于内地与香港特别行政区相互执行仲裁裁决的补充安排》(下称「《补充安排》」)，以及作出轻微文本修订，并更新《仲裁 ( 纽约公约缔约方 ) 令》(第609章，附属法例A)。《修订条例》共有3个部分，其中包括：
(1) 第1部的导言，规定了该条例的简称及生效日期；
(2) 第2部的修订《仲裁条例》，包括根据补充安排的修订内容，取消对于认可内地仲裁当局的「名单制」以及允许当事方同时向内地和香港特区的法院申请执行仲裁裁决；及
(3) 第3部的修订《仲裁 (纽约公约缔约方) 令》，在附表加入帕劳、埃塞俄比亚、汤加和塞拉利昂四个缔约方。
回顾《补充安排》的签署
2020年11月27日，香港特区政府与最高人民法院签署《补充安排》，对两地于1999年6月21日签订的《关于内地与香港特别行政区相互执行仲裁裁决的安排》(下称「《安排》」) 进行修订，在以下几个方面对《安排》的内容进行进一步的完善：
(a) 更明确地订明在《安排》有关执行仲裁裁决方面涵盖「认可」一词；
(b) 更明确地以明文厘清当事方可以在法院接受执行仲裁裁决的申请之前或之后申请保全措施；
(c) 取消对于认可内地仲裁当局的「名单制」，使仲裁裁决范围的定义与国际上普遍采用的《纽约公约》的「仲裁地」定义方式保持一致；及
(d) 免除目前在《安排》下的限制，允许当事方同时向内地和香港特区的法院申请执行仲裁裁决。
上述第 (a) 及 (b) 项的修订已经于《补充安排》签订的同日生效，即2020年11月27日。而第 (c) 及 (d) 项的修订将通过《修订条例》于2021年5月19日起正式生效。
《修订条例》及《补充安排》对两地仲裁的影响
《修订条例》对《补充安排》的修订内容进行了更加全面及贯彻的实施，无疑为两地仲裁裁决的相互执行提供了助力及便利。
由于《修订条例》取消了对于认可内地仲裁机构的限制，更多内地仲裁机构以及在内地的域外仲裁机构作出的仲裁裁决会在香港得到认可和执行，这样一来，当事方在内地进行仲裁亦会有更广泛的仲裁机构选择。
另外，长久以来内地与香港存在不能同时在两地申请执行仲裁裁决的限制，因此经常会出现由于内地或者香港执行程序耗时较长，胜诉当事方在申请第二次执行程序时可能已经超出诉讼时效，或者被执行人已经进行了资产转移。《修订条例》生效后，这一环节将得到完善。允许胜诉当事方同时向内地和香港法院申请执行仲裁裁决，对胜诉当事方的利益提供了保障，亦在一定程度上对被执行人转移资产的恶意行为作出了限制，加强了两地仲裁裁决的执行效率和执行力度。
从长远的角度而言，《补充安排》在促进涉及内地与香港的国际贸易方面具有特殊地位，为从事国际商业贸易的公司和个人在解决争议的方面提供了极大的便利和更多的选择。相信《修订条例》及《补充安排》的全面实施，会进一步促进香港法律及争议解决服务的发展，并且提升香港作为法律、促成交易及争议解决服务的国际法律枢纽的地位。
本文由本所合伙人，诉讼及争议解决部主管徐凯怡律师和黄晊晄律师撰写。若阁下想了解更多详情，请联络本所徐凯怡律师 (heidichui.office@sw-hk.com)。
于本文中提供的一切资料仅供参考，不构成任何法律意见，资料亦受制于适用规定及法例不时的更新与修改。若需取得相关法律意见，须咨询法律顾问。
29 Mar 2021
Stevenson, Wong & Co. advised Hywin Holdings Ltd. (NASDAQ: HYW) on its successful listing on Nasdaq Global Market
Stevenson, Wong & Co. acted as the Hong Kong legal advisers to Hywin Holdings Ltd. (NASDAQ: HYW) (“Hywin Holdings”) on its successful listing on the Nasdaq Global Market on 26 March 2021. Hywin Holdings offered a total number of 3,000,000 American Depositary Shares, priced at US$10.00 per share, raising gross proceeds of approximately US$30,000,000. The joint underwriters were Network 1 Financial Securities, Inc., Alexander Capital L.P. and Valuable Capital Limited.
Established in 2006 and headquartered in Shanghai, Hywin Holdings is the 3rd largest independent wealth management service provider in China. The company offers wealth management services, insurance brokerage and asset management services.
Our Partner Mr. Hank Lo, Senior Associate Mr. Gordon Tsang, Associate Mr. Bun Chan, Registered Foreign Lawyer Ms. Alice Ma and Paralegal Mr. Arthur Hung, acted as the Hong Kong legal counsel for the issuer in the Nasdaq Listing. Mr. Steven Zu, Mr. Frank Xu, Ms. Joy Huang, Mr. Lin Ken and Ms. Elain Yu from our associated firm, Allbright Law Offices (Shanghai) acted as the issuer’s PRC legal counsel for the Nasdaq Listing.
Please contact Mr. Hank Lo or Mr. Gordon Tsang for any enquiries or further information about this transaction.
26 Mar 2021
Stevenson, Wong & Co. as One of the Founding Members of the Cyberport Professional Services Network
On 17 March 2021, Cyberport held a virtual launching ceremony for the Cyberport Professional Services Network (CPN), a hub that connects professional consultancy firms offering professional services and support to the start-ups community. Stevenson, Wong & Co. is pleased to be one of the founding members of the CPN.
The virtual launching event was officiated by Dr. George Lam, Chairman of Cyberport, and Dr. Stella Kwan, Chief Corporate Development Officer of Cyberport. The CPN is an important complementary addition to the Cyberport ecosystem that joins hands with the Cyberport Enterprise Network, Cyberport Investors Network, and Cyberport Technology Network to support Cyberport’s community of start-ups. Over 20 international and local professional consultancy firms have joined the network, offering specialised assistance such as legal services, technology consultancy and market development advisory.
Stevenson, Wong & Co., as one of the founding members, will be providing legal services, including but not limited to financing, corporate services & compliance, and company secretarial services to support the start-ups for their growth journey.
Please contact Mr. Hank Lo and Ms. Ling Ling for further enquiries about this event and our services.
26 Mar 2021
(中文) 香港破产清盘法发展：承认及协助外地清盘人
(中文) 随着越来越多的公司选择在海外注册地申请清盘或债务重组，香港法院处理跨境清盘协助申请的案件也日益增多。最近半年内，香港法院原讼法庭夏利士法官 (Mr Justice Harris) 在三宗具标志性意义的案件中就承认及协助外地清盘人 (foreign or offshore liquidators) 及 (在承认外地清盘人的基础上) 审理搁置 (stay) 或押后 (adjourn) 香港的清盘程序确立了重要的法律原则。该三件案件分别为五龙电动车集团有限公司案 Re FDG Electric Vehicles Ltd [2020] HKCFI 2931 (判决日期为2020年11月19日)、林达控股有限公司案 Re Lamtex Holdings Ltd [2021] HKCFI 622 (判决日期为2021年3月11日) 及平安证券集团 (控股) 有限公司案 Re Ping An Securities Group (Holdings) Ltd [2021] HKCFI 651 (判决日期为2021年3月12日)。本文将对香港承认及协助外地清盘人的基本背景以及上述案件中确立的法律原则做简要介绍。
基本法律原则及背景
一般而言，香港法院在普通法下有权承认及协助外地清盘人，或者从更广泛的意义上说，有权承认及协助在外地开展的清盘程序。
夏利士法官在三宗案件的判决中，均有解释承认外地清盘人是基于国际私法 (private international law) 中的「修正普遍主义」 (modified universalism) 原则，该原则要求香港法院与展开清盘程序的主要国家 (或地区) (country of the principal liquidation) 的法院合作，确保被清盘公司的所有资产在单一的分配制度下摊分给被清盘公司的债权人。
自 2014 年起，香港法院处理了多宗搁置或押后香港清盘程序的申请，这些申请主要是由被清盘的离岸香港上市公司的注册地法院委任的低度干预的临时清盘人 (soft-touch provisional liquidators) 作出的。通常在香港的清盘程序开始后，这些离岸公司便会向其注册地法院申请清盘并委任低度干预的临时清盘人。然后，它们会申请搁置或押后香港的清盘程序，理由是香港法院应尊重离岸法院 (offshore court)，协助处理离岸法院发出的请求书 (letter of request) ，以示司法礼让 (judicial comity)。
根据夏利士法官的观察，从表面上来看，这些申请主要是为了在注册地及香港两个司法管辖区一同推行债务重组安排 (scheme of arrangement) 以协助离岸公司进行债务重组。可是，鉴于这些离岸公司通常缺乏实际 (realistic) 的债务重组前景，这些申请经常被利用来阻挠或拖延合法开展的香港清盘程序。基于这一背景，夏利士法官在以下案件中就香港法院处理跨境清盘协助申请确立了最新的法律原则。
01
五龙电动车集团有限公司案
[2020] HKCFI 2931
五龙电动车集团有限公司 (下称「五龙公司」) 是一家百慕达注册的香港上市公司。在2020年7月，由于财务困难，五龙公司在百慕达进行清盘，而五龙公司的百慕达临时清盘人向香港法院申请，当中包括承认百慕达的临时清盘人身份并搁置香港的清盘程序的申请。
夏利士法官裁定，香港法院承认离岸临时清盘令并不会当然导致香港的清盘程序遭搁置，若五龙公司有意申请搁置香港的清盘程序，五龙公司应另外向香港法院公司法庭的法官申请指令。香港法院会视乎具体案情，包括 (a) 离岸低度干预的临时清盘是否可被视为集体破产程序(collective insolvency process)，及 (b) 搁置会否违反吉布斯规则 (Gibbs Rule)(即外国债务人的债务除非根据有关法律得到解除，否则不会解除该债务)，从而对香港的清盘程序做出案件管理指令 (case management directions)。
02
林达控股有限公司案
[2021] HKCFI 622
在本案中，林达控股有限公司 (下称「林达公司」) 是一家百慕达注册的香港上市公司，而债权人先在香港提出了清盘呈请。随后，林达公司在百慕达取得了低度干预的临时清盘令及请求书，以反对香港的清盘呈请。夏利士法官在考虑了过往香港及英国法院案例中采取的传统立场 (orthodox position) ，即只承认在注册地获委任的外地清盘人之后，认为香港法院不应再僵化地坚持这一传统立场。夏利士法官认为，香港法院应采取符合「香港特别行政区及内地的商业实践 (commercial practice)」的方法来处理承认及协助外地清盘人的问题。
夏利士法官指出，香港商界都有个共同特点，就是虽然使用在离岸司法管辖区注册的控股公司，但这些公司跟相关的离岸司法管辖区并无联系 (connection)，所以该些司法管辖区经常被称为「信箱」(“letterbox”) 管辖区。
夏利士法官进一步强调，传统立场现时缺乏灵活性、存在限制、不符合商业惯例，对香港不利。相反，他认为香港法院应采取的新立场是，承认于公司主要利益中心 (centre of main interest, “COMI”) 或与公司有足够紧密联系的司法管辖区获委任的清盘人。
对于确立进行清盘程序的主要司法管辖区的潜在争议，夏利士法官订立了下列法律原则：
(1) 一般来说，公司的注册地应是公司清盘的司法管辖区；实际上，该司法管辖区将决定摊分公司资产给债权人的制度。
(2) 但是，如果主要利益中心在其他地方，法院则需要考虑其他因素包括：
(a) 公司是否为控股公司，如果是，集团结构是否需要以注册地为主要司法管辖区从而能够更有效地清盘或重组集团。
(b) 考虑到公司与主要利益中心联系的强度，将注册地置于优先地位 (primacy) 不现实 / 人为强加 (artificial) 的程度。
(c) 债权人的意见。
(判决原文如下:
(1) Generally, the place of incorporation should be the jurisdiction in which a company should be liquidated; in practice this means it will be the system for distributions to creditors.
(2)However, if the COMI is elsewhere regard is to be had to other factors:
(a) Is the company a holding company and, if so, does the group structure require the place of incorporation to be the primary jurisdiction in order effectively to liquidate or restructure the group.
(b) The extent to which giving primacy to the place of incorporation is artificial having regard to the strength of the COMI’s connection with its location.
(c) The views of creditors.)
夏利士法官认为，如果一家公司的主要利益中心跟其注册地 (为离岸司法管辖区) 不同，在大多数情况下，在主要利益中心管理清盘程序更为有效，并能够更好反映现实。考虑到林达公司的主要业务、债权人、股东及资产都在内地和香港，而在百慕达法院任命低度干预的临时清盘人或聆讯时，未有证据显示林达公司存在可信的债务重组方案，夏利士法官认为这样的低度干预临时清盘是有问题的，并裁定在香港清盘林达公司。
03
平安证券集团 (控股)有限公司案
[2021] HKCFI 651
与林达公司的情况相似的是，平安证券集团 (控股) 有限公司 (下称「平安证券」) 也是一家百慕达注册的香港上市公司，而债权人先在香港提出了清盘呈请。随后，平安证券在百慕达取得了低度干预的临时清盘令及请求书，以反对香港的清盘呈请。在应用五龙电动车集团有限公司案 及 林达控股有限公司案 的法律原则后，夏利士法官总结，当有一家外地注册公司在香港申请清盘，并在其注册地申请了低度干预的临时清盘后，试图申请押后香港的清盘程序以争取时间规划重组及推行债务偿还安排，香港法院是不会自动把注册地低度干预的临时清盘优先于香港的清盘呈请的。然而，考虑到平安证券预计在短时间内可以向法庭展现债务重组方案的进展，夏利士法官批准押后两个月后再处理清盘呈请。
总结
从这三宗案件夏利士法官的判决中，我们可以预期香港的跨境清盘协助领域将会开启崭新及健康的篇章:-
(1) 香港法院会倾向及很可能会以公司的主要利益中心来确定是否承认获委任的清盘人并提供协助。
(2) 香港法院在考虑是否对外地低度干预的临时清盘人提供协助以及协助的具体程度时，将会更加小心审视案件的实际操作及各项事实背景的因素。。
(3) 香港法院会严格审查基于外地低度干预临时清盘程序而作出的搁置或押后香港的清盘程序的申请 ，除非香港法院确信这些公司确实有务实的重组前景，否则不会轻易批准这些申请。
本文由本所合伙人，诉讼及争议解决部主管徐凯怡律师和黄晊晄律师撰写。若阁下想了解更多详情，请联络本所徐凯怡律师 (heidichui.office@sw-hk.com)。
于本文中提供的一切资料仅供参考，不构成任何法律意见，资料亦受制于适用规定及法例不时的更新与修改。若需取得相关法律意见，须咨询法律顾问。
22 Mar 2021
Vivien Leung and Tracy Chu of Denis Chang’s Chambers Shared LGBT Rights, Equality, Diversity and Inclusion with Stevenson, Wong & Co.
On 19 March 2021, Ms. Vivien Leung and Ms. Tracy Chu from Denis Chang’s Chambers shared recent LGBT developments and the legal implications of LGBT rights, equality, diversity, and inclusion at our office in Central.
From the left: Ms. Tracy Chu, our Partner Ms. Heidi Chui, Counsel Mr. Jeremy Chan, our Partner Ms. Catherine Por, Ms. Vivien Leung, our Partners Ms. Wendy Lam and Mr. Osbert Hui
During the presentation, Vivien and Tracy introduced the Hong Kong legal framework on marriage, equality, and anti-discrimination. In addition to discussing the significance of Ng Hon Lam Edgar (Lam Edgar) v Secretary for Justice [2020] HKCFI 2412, Vivien and Tracy also explained the implications of the Court decisions and the framework under the Intestates Estates Ordinance (IEO) and Inheritance Provision for Family and Dependents Ordinance (IPFDO).
