Sorry, this entry is only available in 中文.

Introduction

In May 2021, a cooperation mechanism between Hong Kong and the Mainland on recognition of and assistance to cross border insolvency proceedings (“Cooperation Mechanism”) was implemented. “The Supreme People’s Court’s Opinion on Taking Forward a Pilot Measure in relation to the Recognition of and Assistance to Insolvency Proceedings in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region” (“SPC Opinion”) was further issued to facilitate the implementation of the Cooperation Mechanism.
Recently on 25 January 2022, in the landmark decision of (2021) 粤03认港破1号, the Shenzhen Intermediate People’s Court (“Shenzhen Court”) approved the first ever application for recognition of and assistance to Hong Kong insolvency proceedings.

Between 22 to 25 February 2022, our firm’s Partners Willy Cheng, Lai Lam, Heidi Chui, and Milly Hung, together with our Senior Associate Michael Lau, participated as speakers and panelists at Interlaw’s 2022 Virtual Asia Pacific Regional Meeting, titled “Together, We Work”, which attracted more than 500 delegates around the globe.

The Quality Migrant Admission Scheme (“QMAS”) is a points based admission scheme for global talents to apply to settle in Hong Kong without first securing a job offer as normally required in work visa application. The scheme was first introduced in February 2006 with an initial quota of 1,000 applicants.

Sorry, this entry is only available in 中文.

In July 2021, the Court of First Instance (“CFI”) handed down its decision in Securities and Futures Commission v Isidor Subotic and Others[1] (“Subotic”).

The Subotic decision contains useful discussions on whether the Hong Kong Court has jurisdiction and may exercise it over overseas defendants of statutory claims commenced by the Securities and Futures Commission (“SFC”) in respect of breaches of the Securities and Futures Ordinance (“SFO”).

Without making a general observation that the SFC can enforce the SFO against overseas offenders, the Subotic decision was, on its specific factual matrix and in respect of the jurisdiction issue, in favour of the SFC.

Given that market participants (and offenders) often operate from out of Hong Kong, the Subotic decision is important to the SFC’s effectiveness as a Hong Kong regulator.

An appeal against the Subotic decision (the jurisdiction issue in particular) is pending the determination of the Court of Appeal.

Meanwhile, however, the Subotic decision remains an integral part of the SFC’s arsenal. On 14 February 2022, the reasonings in Subotic were adopted in SFC v Yik Fong Fong and Others[2], which decision was in favour of the SFC.