二零一九年五月 MAY 2019 HK$308
COVER STORY 封面專題 Professor
MAY 2019 Lutz-Christian
2019年5月 Wolff Incoming Dean, Faculty of Law, The Chinese University of Hong Kong 鄔楓教授 香港中文大學法律學院 候任院長
CRIMINAL LAW 刑事法 PROFESSION 專業導論 DISPUTE RESOLUTION 解決糾紛 Upskirting – Where is the A Pleading Mess The Hong Kong Legal Industry Should Participate in the Law to Cover the Offence? 狀書撰寫的亂象 Greater Bay Area Development with Open Vision and Wide 裙底偷拍–這項罪行受何 Perspective 法例涵蓋？ 香港法律行業須以遠見及廣闊視野參與大灣區發展 porsche_992_Hong_Kong_Lawyer.pdf 1 15/4/2019 7:22 PM
C
M
Y
CM
MY
CY
CMY
K www.hk-lawyer.org Hong Kong Lawyer 香港律師 The official journal of The Law Society of Hong Kong (incorporated with limited liability) 香港律師會 (以有限法律責任形式成立) 會刊 www.hk-lawyer.org
Editorial Board 編輯委員會
Chairman 主席 Huen Wong 王桂壎 Inside your May issue Nick Chan 陳曉峰 Peter CH Chan 陳志軒 五月期刊內容 Charles CC Chau 周致聰 Michelle Cheng 鄭美玲 編者的話 Heidi KP Chu 朱潔冰 3 EDITOR’S NOTE Julianne P Doe 杜珠聯 會長的話 Elliot Fung 馮以德 4 PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE Steven Brian Gallagher 6 CONTRIBUTORS 投稿者 Warren P Ganesh 莊偉倫 Julienne Jen 任文慧 7 DISCIPLINARY DECISIONS 紀律裁決 Karen Lam 藍嘉妍 Byron TW Leung 梁東華 8 FROM THE SECRETARIAT 律師會秘書處資訊 Stella SY Leung 梁淑儀 Adamas KS Wong 黃嘉晟 11 FROM THE COUNCIL TABLE 理事會議題 Tony YH Yen 嚴元浩 封面專題 THE COUNCIL OF THE 14 COVER STORY 專訪鄔楓教授 LAW SOCIETY OF HONG KONG Face to Face with 香港律師會理事會 Professor Lutz-Christian Wolff 香港中文大學法律學院 Incoming Dean, Faculty of Law, The Chinese 候任院長 President 會長 University of Hong Kong Melissa K Pang 彭韻僖
Vice Presidents 副會長 22 LAW SOCIETY NEWS 律師會新聞 Amirali B Nasir 黎雅明 刑事法 Brian W Gilchrist 喬柏仁 32 CRIMINAL LAW CM Chan 陳澤銘 Upskirting – Where is the Law to Cover the 裙底偷拍–這項罪行受何 Offence? 法 例涵蓋？ Council Members 理事會成員 Thomas ST So 蘇紹聰 37 PROFESSION 專業導論 Stephen WS Hung 熊運信 A Pleading Mess 狀書撰寫的亂象 Billy WY Ma 馬華潤 Cecilia KW Wong 黃吳潔華 42 DISPUTE RESOLUTION 解決糾紛 Denis G Brock 白樂德 The Hong Kong Legal Industry Should 香港法律行業須以遠見及 Nick Chan 陳曉峰 Participate in the Greater Bay Area 廣闊視野參與大灣區發展 Serina KS Chan 陳潔心 Development with Open Vision and Wide Warren P Ganesh 莊偉倫 Simon SC Lai 黎壽昌 Perspective Roden ML Tong 湯文龍 Postage Paid 48 INDUSTRY INSIGHTS 業界透視 Permit HONG KONG LAWYER Hong Kong Robert C Rhoda 羅睿德 E No. 5643 THE OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF THE LAW SOCIETY OF HONG KONG 香港律師會會刊 Port Paye Jonathan Ross 羅彰南 66 CASES IN BRIEF 案例撮要 Pierre TH Chan 陳達顯 Eric TM Cheung 張達明 78 PRACTICE SKILLS 實踐技能 Karen Lam 藍嘉妍 Careen HY Wong 黄巧欣 82 PROFESSIONAL MOVES 會員動向 Secretary General 秘書長 律師閒情 Heidi KP Chu 朱潔冰 86 LAWYERS AT LEISURE Balancing Between Work and on the Board 船上的工作與生活平衡 Law Society’s Contact: www.hklawsoc.org.hk PRINTED MATTER If undelivered, please return to 與律師會聯繫 Tel: +852 2846 0500 90 CAMPUS VOICES 法學院新聞Unit F, 14/F., Wah Lik Industrial Centre, Annual Subscription 全年訂閱: HK$3,696 459-469 Castle Peak Road, 106 LEGAL TRIVIA QUIZ #56 法律知識測驗#56Tsuen Wan Thomson Reuters Hong Kong Limited 16/F, Cityplaza 3, Taikoo Shing, Hong Kong Tel: +852 2847 2088 www.thomsonreuters.com ISSN 1025-9554 Subscribe to our FREE e-Newsletter © Copyright is reserved throughout. No part of this publication can be reproduced in whole or part without the express permission of for the latest legal trends and developments in the editor. Contributions are invited, but copies of work should be kept, as Hong Kong Lawyer can accept no responsibility for loss. Hong Kong and China
HKlawyer-Carr-Sht.indd 2 www.hk-lawyer.org 1 4/29/18 18:21 MAY 2019 二零一九年五月 HK$308
Managing Editor 執行主編 Ranajit Dam 鄧文杰 [email protected] Tel: +65 6870 3393
Lead Editor 編輯 Navin G. Ahuja [email protected] Tel: +65 87667479 / +852 3008 8928
Design and Production 設計及制作 John Agra [email protected]
Translation team 翻譯組 InfoPower Tang Mei Kwan
Special thanks to Hong Kong Law Reports & Digest and Reuters News 特別感謝 香港法律彙報與摘錄 及 路透社新聞
For marketing/promotion opportunities please contact:
Head of Legal Media Business, Asia & Emerging Markets Amantha Chia 謝京庭 [email protected] Tel: +65 6870 3917
For subscriptions contact: PRINT
Traffic Administrator 統籌 Dorothy Yu 余文蔚 SUBSCRIPTION [email protected] Tel: +852 2843 6936 AVAILABLE STAY IN THE KNOW All information and views expressed by contributors and advertisements in Hong Kong Hong Kong Lawyer, as the official monthly magazine of the Lawyer do not necessarily reflect Law Society of Hong Kong, provides the legal community with the official opinion of The Law news and insights necessary to keep abreast of the latest trends Society of Hong Kong. Whilst and developments. every effort is made to ensure editorial and commercial integrity, no responsibility is accepted by The magazine focuses on topical, relevant content through the Publisher or The Law Society features and regular sections, and ensures that each issue is of Hong Kong for the accuracy of read and trusted amongst the legal community. To get it online, material appearing in this journal. simply go to www.hk-lawyer.org. Members are encouraged to contribute but the Editorial Board To receive a hard copy of Hong Kong Lawyer, you can make a single of The Law Society of Hong Kong purchase of HKD308 for 1 issue, or HKD3,696 for 12 issues. reserves the right to publish only To proceed with print subscription, please contact material it deems appropriate. Dorothy Yu at: [email protected]
2 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • EDITOR’S NOTE 編者的話
EDITOR'S NOTE 編者的話
More than 110 incidents of mobile phone users attempting to upskirt 據報道，2013年發生了110多起手機使用 were reported in 2013. Upskirting refers to the taking of sexually 者試圖偷拍裙底的事件。偷拍裙底是指在 intrusive photos or videos beneath a person’s clothing without having 沒有獲得某人同意的情況下，在其衣服下 obtained consent, which is a humiliating violation of that person’s 拍攝侵犯性的照片或視頻，而這是對該人 privacy. Although the perpetrators are generally charged for such 私隱的侮辱性侵犯。雖然犯事者一般因犯 wrongdoing, the prosecutors have been relying on a law which was 有此類罪行而被檢控，但檢控官一直依賴 enacted in 1993, ie prior to the advent of mobile phones. The Criminal 的是於1993年（即在流動電話出現之前） Law feature provides an analysis on whether the existing arrangement 頒佈的一項法律。「刑事法」專欄分析了 is adequate in order to tackle upskirting. 現有的安排是否足以對付偷拍裙底的行 為。 When litigation appears to be unavoidable, the parties to the dispute will be required to exchange pleadings such as a statement of claim, 當訴訟似乎是不可避免時，爭議各方將被要 defence, etc. Assuming the traditional route where solicitors are 求交換如申索書和抗辯書等狀書。假如採用 approached for handling the case and subsequently barristers are 傳統的途徑，即找律師處理案件，然後委託 instructed to plead the case, who ought to draft the pleadings? The 大律師為案件申辯，應由誰來起草訴狀？「 Profession feature explores the situation as well as the standard of 專業導概」專題文章探討了香港狀書的情況 pleadings in Hong Kong. 和標準。
One of the flavours of the month is the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao 粵港澳大灣區的發展是這個月的亮點之一， Greater Bay Area development given that its economy is estimated to 因據估計，到2030年，其經濟規模將超過 exceed US$3 trillion by 2030. However, how can legal professional get 3萬億美元。然而，既然涉及不同的稅務、 involved since there are different tax, legal and immigration systems 法律和移民制度，法律專業人士將如何參與 involved? The President’s Message and the Dispute Resolution feature 呢？「會長的話」和「解決糾紛」專題分享 share insights on the project. 了對該項目的見解。
There are two final points to share. First, the journal has been 最後還有兩點要分享。首先，雜誌有了新 given a new look with the columns of text looking neater. Is the 的面貌，文字欄看起來更整潔。變化是 STAY IN THE KNOW change for better or worse? Please share your thoughts by emailing 好是壞？請通過電子郵件navin.g.ahuja@ [email protected]. Second, there have been thomsonreuters.com分享你的想法。其次， queries about Hong Kong Lawyer articles which have not appeared 有人對《香港律師》的文章提出疑問，這些 in the journal but are posted online. I would like to remind our 文章沒有出現在雜誌上，但卻張貼在網上。 readers that they can subscribe to our free e-Newsletter (offered 我想提醒我們的讀者，他們可以訂閱我們的 “exclusively online”) to receive regular updates on the latest 免費電子報（「只在網上」提供），定期獲 trends and developments in Hong Kong and China. Please visit 得有關香港和中國最新趨勢和發展的最新消 http://hk-lawyer.org. 息。請訪問http://hk-lawyer.org.
Navin G. Ahuja Navin G. Ahuja Editor, Hong Kong Lawyer 《香港律師》編輯 Legal Media Group Thomson Reuters Legal Media Group 湯森路透
www.hk-lawyer.org 3 • May 2019
PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE 會長的話
Greater Bay Area
By setting a clear regional development strategy, the State Council’s Outline Development Plan (“Plan”) for the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area (“Greater Bay Area”) aims at coordinating the cooperation and development holistically among the nine Pearl River Delta Municipalities Hong Kong’s leading position as an lawyer for Hong Kong solicitors. The (including Guangzhou, Shenzhen international centre of finance, trade, OLQE is a special examination set for Zhuhai, Foshan, Huizhou, Dongguan, asset management, transportation, legal practitioners qualified outside Zhongshan, Jiangmen and Zhaoqing aviation and legal and dispute resolution Hong Kong to gain admission as Hong in Guangdong Province, the “nine PRD services is reaffirmed in the Plan. Kong solicitors, giving proper regard municipalities”) and the two Special Leveraging on Hong Kong’s capabilities to the practice experience of the Administrative Regions, Hong Kong in these areas, the Plan supports Hong candidates in their home jurisdictions. and Macao. Kong to be the regional centre for IP The development of the Greater Bay trading, financing for high tech industries Area enhances the flow of capital, talent The Greater Bay Area, covering a total in the Greater Bay Area, mediation and and knowledge creating opportunities area of 56,000 square kilometers, had arbitration with respect to economic of close interaction, exchanges and a combined population of about 70 and trade activities in the Greater Bay collaboration at all levels within the million and gross domestic product at Area, servicing for investment, financing Greater Bay Area. Yet, taking into around RMB70 trillion in 2017. Hong and resolution of commercial disputes account the differences in culture, social Kong, along with Macao, Guangzhou arising from the Belt and Road Initiative and economic structures and legal and Shenzhen, has been identified as and an active player in the operation systems, the process can be challenging. one of the four core cities to drive and of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Mistrust often arises from a lack of lead the development of the Greater Bay Bank. The legal services to support mutual understanding. The facilitation Area. the implementation of these strategic of Hong Kong lawyers gaining Mainland policies will be in demand. legal qualifications through a special The Plan covers the immediate term from examination similar to our OLQE will now to 2022 as well as the longer term Practice within Greater Bay Area incentivise more Hong Kong lawyers to to 2035. The framework, by which each actively pursue a better understanding city contributes its unique functionalities Qualification of the Mainland legal system through to complement the overall development The Plan also highlights that further studying for the examination. It will of the city cluster, is to be established by studies will be undertaken on practice provide an avenue to enable experienced 2022 and fully implemented by 2035. qualification and scope of practice for Hong Kong solicitors in identified practice Hong Kong legal practitioners in the areas to qualify as Mainland lawyers who Long Term Positioning nine PRD municipalities. will help strengthen the talent pool to A number of areas mentioned in the support the growing demand for multi- Plan are relevant to the legal profession Modelling on our Overseas Lawyers jurisdictional legal services in the Greater in Hong Kong. They are certainly Qualification Examination (“OLQE”), Bay Area and nurture deeper mutual important factors to consider when law the Law Society has been lobbying understanding of the differences in the firms and practitioners plan their long- for years for the adoption of a similar legal systems. The Law Society takes term business and career development. route to qualification as a Mainland every opportunity to explain this “win-
4 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE 會長的話
win” proposal to the relevant authorities 供的特殊考試，同時適當考慮考生 and in our recent visit to Beijing in April, 大灣區 在其當地司法管轄區的執業經驗， the Council had a good discussion with 以獲得認許為香港律師。大灣區的 the Ministry of Justice on it. We will 國務院通過制定明確的區域發展策 發展增強了資本、人才和知識的流 continue to work on it. 略而推出的《粵港澳大灣區（「大灣 動；為大灣區內部各個層面的密切 區」）發展規劃綱要》（《規劃》 互動、交流和合作創造了機會。然 Partnership Associations ），旨在協調珠江三角洲九個城市（ 而，考慮到文化、社會和經濟結構 The Plan also strongly supports the 包括廣東省的廣州、深圳、珠海、 以及法律制度的差異，這一過程或 cooperation of Guangdong, Hong 佛山、惠州、東莞、中山、江門和肇 具挑戰性。不信任往往源於缺乏相 Kong and Macao law firms through 慶，「珠三角九市」）與香港及澳門 互理解。類似OLQE的特別考試可促 partnership associations to strengthen 兩個特別行政區的整體合作與發展。 成香港律師獲得內地法律資格，激 the legal services industry in the Greater 勵更多香港律師通過學習考試積極 Bay Area. 2017年，大灣區總面積已達五萬六 探索更好地了解內地法律制度。這 千平方公里，總人口約七千萬，國 可提供一個途徑，使經驗豐富的香 However, as pointed out from time to 內生產總值約人民幣七十萬億元。 港律師能夠在確定的執業領域獲得 time by the Law Society, the thresholds 香港、澳門、廣州和深圳已被確定 資格成為內地律師；他們將有助於 governing the establishment of 為四大核心城市，帶動及引領大灣 加強人才庫，應對大灣區多司法管 partnership associations between Hong 區的發展。 轄區法律服務不斷增長的需求，並 Kong law firms and Mainland law firms 促進更深入相互了解法律制度的差 remain high. The Hong Kong law firm in 該《規劃》涵蓋了從現在到2022年 異。律師會利用了一切機會向有關 a partnership association is subject to a 以及到2035年的長期規劃。其框架 當局解釋這個「雙贏」的建議，及 limit in the capital injection ratio of not 將在2022年前建立並在2035年前全 在近期四月訪問北京時，理事會就 less than 30 percent and not more than 面實施。藉著框架每個城市以其獨 此與司法部進行了良好討論。我們 49 percent. There is also a total capital 特的職能作出貢獻，相辅相成以促 亦將就此繼續努力。 injection requirement of not less than 進城市群的整體發展。 RMB5 million to the association. Capital 合夥聯營 injection should be a matter for the parties 長期定位 《規劃》同時大力支持粵港澳律師 to an association to decide. 《規劃》中提到的數個領域與香港 事務所合夥聯營進行合作，加強大 的法律專業有關。當律師事務所和 灣區的法律服務行業。 Further, a partnership association set 從業人員規劃其長期業務和職業發 up in the China (Guangdong) Pilot Free 展時，其必然為重要的考慮因素。 然而，正如律師會不時指出，香港律 Trade Zone is currently permitted to 師事務所與內地律師事務所之間建立 engage, in the name of the partnership 《規劃》重申香港作為國際金融、貿 合夥聯營的門檻仍然很高。合夥聯營 association, Hong Kong and Macao 易、資產管理、運輸、航空與法律和 的香港律師事務所的注資比例受到限 lawyers, but not Mainland lawyers. Only 爭議解決服務中心的領先地位。憑藉 制，即不低於30％且不超過49％，並 law firms, not individual lawyers, are 香港在這方面的能力，《規劃》可助 且聯營的注資總額不得少於人民幣五 permitted to be partners of a partnership 香港成為區域知識產權貿易、大灣區 百萬元。注資應該由聯營各方決定。 association. 高科技產業融資與大灣區經濟貿易活 動的調解和仲裁中心，並為「一帶一 此外，在中國（廣東）自由貿易試 The Law Society has been lobbying 路」倡議的投資、融資和解決商業糾 驗區設立的合夥聯營，目前可以 for a relaxation or removal of these 紛提供服務，同時積極參與亞洲基礎 合夥聯營的名義聘請香港和澳門律 rigid governing provisions. We took 設施投資銀行的運作。將來對可協助 師，但不可聘請內地律師。而且只 the opportunity to raise our proposals 實施有關戰略政策的法律服務有相當 有律師事務所而非個人律師可以成 again with the Ministry of Justice in our 需求。 為合夥聯營的合夥人。 April visit. We were pleased that we had received positive feedback from 在大灣區執業 律師會一直在遊說放寬或取消該等 the Mainland authorities and we will 嚴格的管理規定。我們藉著4月份的 continue to work hard to progress them. 資格 訪問再次向司法部提呈了我們的建 《規劃》同時強調，將對珠三角九 議。我們欣然收到內地當局的積極 市的香港法律從業人員的執業資格 反饋，並將繼續努力以取得進展。 和執業範圍作進一步研究。
律師會以海外律師資格考試（ 「OLQE」）為例，多年來一直遊說 採用類似的途徑，藉此讓香港律師 可獲得內地律師資格。OLQE是為 Melissa K Pang, President 香港以外地區合資格法律執業者提 彭韻僖 會長
www.hk-lawyer.org 5 • AprilMay 2019 2019
CONTRIBUTORS 投稿者
Edward Liu 劉洋 Counsel, Hill Dickinson 希德律師行法務總監 Vice-President, The Hong Kong and Mainland Legal Profession 香港與內地法律專業聯合會副會長 Association 劉先生在中國及英國均擁有執業資格，專門 Qualified in both China and England & Wales, Mr. Liu specialises in shipping 從事航運和商業的訴訟和仲裁業務。他的專 and commercial litigation and arbitration. His practices covers all areas of 業涵蓋海事和商業法的所有領域，包括租船 maritime and commercial law, including charterparty and shipbuilding 和造船合約糾紛、貨物索償、貨物買賣糾紛、 contract disputes, cargo claims, sale of goods disputes, marine insurance 海事保險和投資爭端等。他曾處理過種類廣泛 and investment disputes etc. He handles a wide variety of cases of different 且涉及不同類型和大小的根據倫敦海事仲裁協 types and sizes under LMAA Terms, HKIAC rules and UNCITRAL rules. 會條款、香港國際仲裁中心機構仲裁規則和 He has published numerous articles and case commentaries in respect UNCITRAL仲裁規則處理的仲裁案件。他在英 of shipping and arbitration topics in reputable journals and newsletters in 國、中國內地和香港的著名期刊和新聞通訊中 England, Mainland China and Hong Kong. He is a member of The Chartered 發表了大量有關航運及仲裁的文章和案例評 Institute of Arbitrators, a listed arbitrator of Hong Kong International 析。他是英國特許仲裁員協會會員、香港國際 Arbitration Centre, a member of Hong Kong Maritime Arbitrators Group 仲裁中心名單仲裁員、香港海事仲裁員協會會 and a supporting member of London Maritime Arbitrators’ Association. 員以及倫敦海事仲裁員協會支持會員。
Errol Bong Errol Bong APAC Head of Legal & Compliance at Liquidnet Liquidnet亞太區法律與合規主管
Errol Bong is qualified in New South Wales, Australia, Hong Kong, Errol Bong在新南威爾士、澳大利亞、香 England & Wales, New York and Washington State. He has been 港、英格蘭及威爾士、紐約和華盛頓州都有 practising law for more than 18 years and has participated in several Hong 律師資格。他已從事法律專業超過18年，並 Kong Law Society mentoring projects. He is currently the APAC Head of 曾參與多項香港律師會輔導計劃。他現為亞 Legal and Compliance, a leader in institutional investment technology 太會計師公會法律及合規部主管，也是機構 and licensed by the Securities and Futures Commission for Automated 投資科技的領導者，並獲證券及期貨事務監 Trading Services and Dealing in Securities and a participant of the Hong 察委員會(證監會)發牌，負責自動化交易服務 Kong Exchange. 及證券交易。他也是香港交易所的參與者。
Neville Sarony QC 蘇朗年 π Chambers π Chambers，御用大律師
Mr. Sarony is, first and foremost, an advocate who relishes trial work which 蘇朗年大律師對審判工作津津樂道，他把審 he likens to a cross between a knight errant and a street fighter both of 判比喻為一個武俠和街頭鬥士之間的交鋒， whom are constrained by the rules and the conventions of courtesy to 當中他們兩者均受到有關規則，以及對法院 Court and opponent. Though sometimes pigeon-holed as a P.I. specialist, 和對手所負有的禮節慣例所限制。雖然他有 in fact his practice covers almost the entire spectrum. When not writing, 時被歸納為人身傷害案件的專家，但其實他 cooking or sailing, he can be found playing jazz piano. 的執業範圍幾乎涵蓋了所有範疇。除了寫 作、烹飪和航行外，他亦喜愛演奏爵士鋼琴。
Editorial Note: The Chinese translation of Carmen Wong’s title on the Contributors page in the March 2019 issue of Hong Kong Lawyer was incorrect. The correct title is “奧睿律 師事務所律師 黃敏晶”. Any inconvenience is regretted. 編者按：於律師會會刊三月期刊中，撰稿人頁面上黃敏晶的中文頭銜譯文出現錯誤。正確頭銜應為「奧睿律師事務所律師黃敏晶」。不便之處，敬請見諒。
6 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • DISCIPLINARY DECISIONS 紀律裁決
DISCIPLINARY DECISIONS 紀律裁決
Lai Wing Fai (“Respondent”) 賴榮輝 (下稱「答辯人」) Rule 2(a), (c) and (d) of the Solicitors’ Practice Rules (Cap. 159H)(“SPR”) 《律師執業規則》(第159H章) (下稱《執業規 Hearing date: 23 January 2019 則》)第2(a)、(c)及(d)條 Statement of Findings and Order: 21 February 2019 聆訊日期：2019年1月23日 On 23 January 2019, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (“Tribunal”) 裁斷陳述及命令：2019年2月21日 heard the Law Society’s case and the Respondent was absent. The Tribunal found that the Complaint had been proved as follows:- 律師紀律審裁組(下稱「審裁組」)於2019年1 月23日在答辯人缺席下聆訊律師會的申請。 The Complaint 審裁組裁斷對答辯人的以下申訴證明屬實： The Respondent, formerly a solicitor of Messrs. Lai & Associates (an intervened firm), engaged in conduct which compromised or impaired 申訴 or was likely to compromise or impair his independence or integrity, 答辯人是賴榮輝律師行(一間介入律師行)的 his duty to act in the best interest of his client and his own reputation 前律師，作出了或准許他人代他作出危及或 or reputation of the profession in breach of rule 2(a), (c) and (d) of 損害或相當可能危及或損害他的獨立性或正 the SPR in that, on 27 March 2017, he was convicted at the Eastern 直品格；他為當事人的最佳利益而行事的職 Magistrates’ Courts, on his own plea of guilty, one count of theft of 責；及他的個人名譽或律師專業的名譽的行 money belonging to his client contrary to s. 9 of the Theft Ordinance 為，因而違反了《執業規則》第2(a)、(c)及 (Cap. 210) and was sentenced to imprisonment of 19 months. The (d)條，事緣他於2017年3月27日在東區裁判 Respondent committed the offence in the course of his practice as a 法院被裁定一項盗竊其客戶金錢罪名成立， solicitor. 違反《盜竊罪條例》(第210章)第9條，答辯 人認罪，被判入獄19個月。答辯人是在他作 The Tribunal ordered: 為律師執業期間犯下該項罪行。 (1) that the Respondent be struck off from the Roll of Solicitors; and 審裁組命令： (2) the Respondent to pay the fixed costs of the proceedings (1) 將答辯人從律師登記冊上剔除；及 which shall be payable by monthly instalments from the date (2) 答辯人支付訴訟的固定訟費，由命令發 of delivery of the Order. 出之日起按月分期支付。
Mr. Jonathan Mok of Messrs. Jonathan Mok Legal, Prosecutor for the 莫子應律師事務所的莫子應律師代表律師會 Law Society (檢控員) The Respondent in person, being absent 答辯人缺席 Mr. Patrick Hui Man Kit, Clerk to the Tribunal 審裁組書記許文傑先生
Tribunal Members: 審裁組成員： Mr. Andrew Nicholas Hart (Chairman) Andrew Nicholas Hart先生 (主席) Mr. Shum Hon Wo 岑漢和先生 Mr. Kelvin Wai-lun Au Yeung 歐陽偉倫先生
www.hk-lawyer.org 7 • May 2019
FROM THE SECRETARIAT 律師會秘書處資訊
Ms. Heidi Chu, Secretary General 秘書長朱潔冰律師
Reducing Overheads 減少經費
“Location, Location, Location” goes the classic advice, stressing the 「地點、地點、地點」這句經典名言所強調的， importance of the location of a business to its success. In deciding the 是一個企業的地點對其成功的重要性。在決定 location, consideration is normally given to factors like brand visibility, 地點時，通常會考慮品牌可見度、與企業互動 convenience to people that interact with the business including clients, 的人（包括客戶、供應商、僱員和其他人）的便 suppliers, employees and others, and costs. Traditionally, law firms in 利性以及成本等因素。傳統上，香港的律師行大 Hong Kong are mostly located in the core business districts, like Central 多位於中環及金鐘等核心商業區，這些地區交 and Admiralty, that are well supported by convenient transport and 通方便，容易前往附近的高等法院、政府註冊處 easily accessible to the nearby High Court, government registries and 及商業大廈，而這些大廈是其大部分客戶的辦 commercial buildings that house most of their clientele. Recently, the 公室所在處。最近，中環寫字樓成本飆升，促使 soaring costs of office space in Central have triggered a relocation of 越來越多國際律師事務所（例如博聞律師事務 an increasing number of international law firms (eg Berwin Leighton 所、英士律師行、富而德律師事務所、貝克.麥 Paisner, Ince & Co, Freshfields, Baker & McKenzie, RPC, Simmons & 堅時、RPC、西蒙斯律師行、安睿順德倫律師事 Simmons, Eversheds) away from the core business district to Quarry 務所）遷離核心商業區，搬到更往東的新興商業 Bay, an emerging business district further east to save costs. 區--鰂魚涌，以節省成本。
Law firms with a bigger scale of operation that requires more office 業務規模較大、需要更多辦公室空間的律師事務 space may find relocation an effective option to save costs. For sole 所可能會覺得搬遷是節約成本的有效方法。對於 practitioners and partnerships of a smaller scale of operation that allow 業務規模較小、在管理自身業務結構方面具有更 more flexibility in managing the structure of their own businesses, 大靈活性的獨營執業者和合夥經營者，還有包括 other cost saving options, including cost sharing, are available. 成本分攤等其他節省成本的方法。
Generally, a solicitor’s practice, be it a sole proprietorship or a 一般來說，律師執業，不論是獨自經營或合夥經 partnership, must be conducted in self-contained premises. Staff and 營，都是在獨立的處所內進行。職員和設施均由 facilities must be under the control of the sole proprietor or partners 律師行的獨營執業者或合夥人管控。除了某些 of the firm. Subject to certain exceptions, a firm is not allowed to 例外情況，一家律師行不得與其他律師行共用處 share premises, facilities or staff with other firms. 所、設施或職員。
8 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • FROM THE SECRETARIAT 律師會秘書處資訊
Having a formal association is one of the exceptions. In situations 成立一個正式的聯營是其中一個例外。在兩家律 where two firms are ready to be closely connected, they may consider 師行準備建立密切聯繫的情況下，該等律師行可 sharing a common equity partner to form a formal association. 以考慮共用一個共同的權益合夥人，以形成一個 Pursuant to Law Society Practice Direction D 5(3)(iii) and 5(5), where 正式的聯營。根據律師會實務指示D5(3)(iii)和5(5) there is such a formal association, the two firms can share premises, ，如果有這樣的正式聯營，這兩家律師行可以共 personnel and facilities. 用處所、職員和設施。
However, some firms may wish to maintain their own independence 然而，一些律師行可能希望保持自己的獨立性， without any form of association with other firms. Operating in the 而不與其他律師行有任何形式的聯營。對這些律 form of a Group Practice may be a cost saving option for these firms. 師行來說，以「律師聯合執業事務所」的形式運 作可能是一種節省成本的選擇。 Group Practice was introduced to enable firms to pool their resources and reduce the operation cost through the sharing of overheads. 「律師聯合執業事務所」是為了使律師行能夠集 Group Practice is not an entity. Neither is it a law firm. Group Practice 中資源，並通過分攤經費來降低運營成本。「律 is a term used to describe the mode of operation whereby two or 師聯合執業事務所」不是一個實體；也不是律師 more law firms conduct their businesses from the same address as 事務所。「律師聯合執業事務所」是指兩間或兩 separate practices but cooperating with each other in sharing the 間以上的律師行在同一地點經營業務的運作模 use of facilities and unqualified staff. By joining a Group Practice as 式，律師行是分開執業的，但卻互相合作地共用 a member, a firm does not lose its identity or change its status. Each 設施和非律師職員。一家律師行加入「律師聯合 member of a Group Practice remains a separate and independent 執業事務所」作為成員，律師行不會失去其身份 practice. Members of a Group Practice are not to be regarded as 或改變其地位。「律師聯合執業事務所」的每一 practising in partnership, save in circumstances expressly provided 個成員仍然是一個分開和獨立的執業實體。除了 for in the relevant legislation, including matters relating to conflict 有關法例明文規定的情況，包括與利益衝突及保 of interest and confidentiality. 密有關的事宜外，「律師聯合執業事務所」的成 員不得被視為合夥執業。 When determining whether there is a conflict of interest, all members of the same Group Practice will be regarded as practising 在決定是否存在利益衝突時，同一「律師聯合執 in partnership. A conflict check before acceptance of instructions by 業事務所」的所有成員均將被視為合夥執業。因 a member should therefore cover all members of the same Group 此，在某一成員接受委託工作之前進行的衝突檢 Practice and not just within the member itself. By way of example, 查應涵蓋同一「律師聯合執業事務所」的所有成 if a member of a Group Practice is already acting for a plaintiff in 員，而不僅僅是該成員本身。例如，如果一家「 a litigation matter, another member of the same Group Practice, 律師聯合執業事務所」的一名成員已在訴訟事 although a different firm, cannot act for the defendant in the same 項中代表原告行事，則同一「律師聯合執業事務 case. The reason is that on the issue of conflict of interest, members of 所」的另一名成員雖然是另一家律師行的，但不 the same Group Practice will be regarded as practising in partnership 能在同一案件中代表被告行事。原因是在利益衝 and solicitors of the same partnership obviously cannot act for 突的問題上，同一「律師聯合執業事務所」的成 opposing parties in the same matter. 員會被視為合夥執業，而同一合夥律師行的律師 顯然不能在同一事項上代表對方行事。 The members of a Group Practice are allowed to share facilities and unqualified staff. To the extent necessary, a member of the Group 「律師聯合執業事務所」的成員可准許共用設施 Practice may have to disclose its clients’ affairs to an unqualified staff 和非律師職員。在需要範圍內，「律師聯合執業 who is at the same time working for other members of the Group 事務所」成員可能須向同時為「律師聯合執業事
www.hk-lawyer.org 9 • May 2019
Practice. When applying the rules of confidentiality to a Group 務所」其他成員工作的非律師職員披露其客戶的 Practice situation, members of the same Group Practice shall be 事情。在應用保密規則於「律師聯合執業事務 regarded as if they are practising in partnership with each other. 所」的情況時，同一「律師聯合執業事務所」的 成員應被視為彼此合夥執業。 The sharing of premises, staff and facilities introduced by the concept of Group Practice are aspects of internal office administration. Group 「律師聯合執業事務所」概念所引入的共用處 Practice does not affect the way legal services are to be provided 所、職員和設施，是一種內部辦公室行政。「律 by solicitors to clients. A client of a member of the Group Practice 師聯合執業事務所」並不影響律師向當事人提供 remains the client of that member. No solicitor-client relationship 法律服務的方式。「律師聯合執業事務所」某成 will be created between the client and other members of the same 員的客戶仍是該成員的客戶。不會在客戶與同一 Group Practice. 「律師聯合執業事務所」的其他成員之間建立律 師 - 客戶關係。 In addition to a reduction of overhead costs, other benefits of operating in the form of a Group Practice may include relief of the 除了減少經營成本之外，以「律師聯合執業事務 stress of running a solo practice through the opportunity to consult, 所」形式運作的其他好處可能包括通過協商、分 share and exchange ideas on legal and other problems with other 享和交流的機會減輕獨自執業的壓力。 members in the Group Practice. 如有任何關於規例或如何成立「律師聯合執業事 Members are welcome to contact us should there be any enquiries 務所」的查詢，歡迎各會員與我們聯絡。有關「 on the regulations or how to go about setting up a Group Practice. 律師聯合執業事務所」的資料，包括有關的規則 Information on Group Practice including the relevant rules (Solicitors （《律師（律師聯合執業事務所）規則》（第 (Group Practice) Rules (Cap. 159 sub leg)) and a manual for setting 159章，附屬法例））及設立「律師聯合執業事 up a Group Practice are available on the Law Society website. 務所」的手冊可在律師會網頁上查閱。
Monthly Statistics on the Profession 業界每月統計資料 (updated as of 31 March 2019): (截至2019年3月31日)：
Members (with or without Practising Certificate) 11,368 會員(持有或不持有執業證書) 11,368 Members with Practising Certificate 9,923 持有執業證書的會員 9,923 (out of whom, 7,483 (80%) are in private practice) (其中有7,483位(80%)是私人執業) Trainee Solicitors 1,258 實習律師 1,258 Registered Foreign Lawyers 1,645 註冊外地律師 1,645 (from 33 jurisdictions) (來自33個司法管轄區) Hong Kong law firms 919 (47% are sole proprietorships and 香港律師行 919 (獨資經營佔47%，2至5名合夥人的 42% are firms with 2 to 5 partners, 37 are limited liability 律師行佔42%，37間為按照《法律執業者條例》 partnerships formed pursuant to the Legal Practitioners Ordinance) 組成的有限法律責任合夥律師行) Registered foreign law firms 86 (16 are limited liability partnerships 註冊外地律師行 86 (16間為按照《法律執業者條例》 formed pursuant to the Legal Practitioners Ordinance) 組成的有限法律責任合夥律師行) Civil Celebrants of Marriages 2,186 婚姻監禮人 2,186 Reverse Mortgage Counsellors 448 安老按揭輔導法律顧問 448 Solicitor Advocates 65 訟辯律師 65 (60 in civil proceedings, 5 in criminal proceedings) (民事程序：60 位，刑事程序：5位) Student Members 316 學生會員 316 Registered Associations between Hong Kong law firms and 40 香港律師行與外地律師行 40 registered foreign law firms (including Mainland law firms) (包括內地律師行)在香港聯營
10 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • FROM THE COUNCIL TABLE 理事會議題
FROM THE COUNCIL TABLE 理事會議題
EVIDENCE AMENDMENT BILL 2018 《2018年證據(修訂)條 例草案》 In 2005, the Law Reform Commission of Hong Kong (“LRC”) published a consultation paper on Hearsay in Criminal Proceedings examining the 香港法律改革委員會(法改會)在2005年發 current law in Hong Kong on hearsay evidence in criminal proceedings 表了有關刑事法律程序中的傳聞證據諮詢文 and setting out various proposals for reform of the law. Having considered 件，研究香港現行刑事法律程序中有關傳聞 the responses received in the consultation, the LRC published an LRC 證據的規則，並提出各項法律改革建議。經 Report in November 2009 recommending a reform of the hearsay rule 考慮各界對諮詢的回應後，法改會於2009年 in criminal proceedings. The proposed model of reform was made up of 11月發表了一份報告書，建議改革刑事法律 a Core Scheme and a series of proposals on special topics. 程序中有關傳聞證據的規則。擬議的改革模 式由核心方案和一系列特定課題的建議組成。 Taking into account the LRC’s views and recommendations, the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) in June 2018 introduced the Evidence 律政司考慮到法改會的意見和建議，於2018 Amendment Bill 2018 (the “Bill”) to the Legislative Council to implement 年6月向立法會提交《2018年證據(修訂)條例 most of the LRC’s recommendations. 草案》(《條例草案》)，以落實法改會的大部 分建議。 The Law Society has studied the Bill. In essence, notwithstanding the various explanations by the DOJ, we have reservations on the latest 律師會研究了《條例草案》。實質上，儘管 legislative proposals. Among other things, we do not consider that the 律政司已作出解釋，但我們對最新的立法建 necessary safeguards for the accused, as canvassed by the LRC in relation 議持保留意見。我們認為，《條例草案》未 to the admission of hearsay evidence, have adequately been reflected in 能充分反映法改會提出就接納傳聞證據前對 the Bill. Those concerns we have raised in the previous submissions are 被告的必要保障。並重申我們在先前提交的 reiterated. 意見書內所提到的關注。
The above observations, together with our comments on the committee 上述意見及我們對律政司提出的委員會審議 stage amendments moved by the DOJ, are set out in a detailed 階段修正案的意見，均在意見書中詳細闡述： submission: http://www.hklawsoc.org.hk/pub_e/news/ http://www.hklawsoc.org.hk/pub_e/news/submissions/20190326.pdf submissions/20190326.pdf
www.hk-lawyer.org 11 • May 2019
LAW REFORM COMMISSION’S 法律改革委員會有關檔 CONSULTATION PAPERS ON 案法及公開資料的諮詢 ARCHIVES LAW AND ON 文件 ACCESS TO INFORMATION 香港法律改革委員會於2018年12月就檔案法 The Law Reform Commission of Hong Kong released two consultation 及公開資料發表了兩份諮詢文件。這兩個主 papers in December 2018 for views. These are on Archives Law and on 題雖然不同但互有相關。有關檔案法的諮詢 Access to Information. The two subject matters are different but are 文件徵詢公眾關於現行公共檔案管理制度是 related - the paper on Archives Law is to consult the public as to whether 否需要改革的意見；如認為需要的話，則採 reform of the current public records management regime is needed; 用何種改革方案為佳。有關公開資料的諮詢 and if so, what kind of reform is to be preferred. The paper on Access to 文件就公眾索取政府所持資料的現行制度是 Information is to seek views from the public on whether the current regime 否需要改革，以及如認為需要的話，則採用 relating to access by the public to information held by the government or 何種改革方案為佳，邀請公眾提出意見。 public authorities should be reformed; and if so, in what way.
律師會個人資料及檔案管理工作小組審視了 The above two consultation papers were reviewed by a working party of 上述兩份諮詢文件。工作小組由不同專家委 the Law Society on Data Privacy and Records Management. The Working 員會的成員組成。他們研究了諮詢問題後， Party comprises members coming from different specialist committees. 提出了兩份意見書，討論包括豁免資料的問 They studied the consultation questions and produced two submissions 題(即資料不予披露)和法律專業保密權的重要 in response. Among other things, in respect of the consultation question 性。意見書強調法律專業保密權在香港是受 on exempt information (i.e. information be withheld from disclosure), 憲法保護的權利，不受任何約束政策的影響。 the importance of Legal Professional Privilege was highlighted. In the submission, it was emphasized that Legal Professional Privilege remains 於2019年3月13日就檔案法提交的意見書： a fundamental and constitutionally protected right in Hong Kong. It is http://www.hklawsoc.org.hk/pub_e/news/ not subject to any competing policy. submissions/20190313.pdf
The submission on the Archives Law dated 13 March 2019 is at: http://www.hklawsoc.org.hk/pub_e/news/submissions/20190313.pdf 於2019年3月13日就公開資料提交的意見 書： The submission on the Access to Information (also dated 13 March 2019) is at: http://www.hklawsoc.org.hk/pub_e/news/ http://www.hklawsoc.org.hk/pub_e/news/submissions/20190313a.pdf submissions/20190313a.pdf
NON-REFOULEMENT PROTECTION: 免遣返保護：政府修訂 THE GOVERNMENT’S PROPOSALS 《入境條例》的建議 TO AMEND THE IMMIGRATION ORDINANCE 政府建議修訂《入境條例》(第115章)有關 審核免遣返聲請及處理上訴的程序，並在
The Government consulted the Legislative Council (“LegCo”) Panel 2018年7月諮詢立法會保安事務委員會。 on Security in July 2018 on some proposals to amend the Immigration 在2019年1月立法會保安事務委員會的會
12 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • FROM THE COUNCIL TABLE 理事會議題
Ordinance Cap 115 (the “Ordinance”) on procedures of screening non- 議上，保安局對條例進一步提出其他修訂建 refoulement claims and handling appeals. At a meeting of the LegCo 議。 Panel on Security in January 2019, the Security Bureau put forward further and other amendment proposals to the Ordinance. 大部分擬議修訂旨在縮短程序以加快審核過 程。政府稱，擬議修訂旨在減少審核延誤、 Many of the proposed amendments seek to fast-track the screening 及改善程序和處理上訴。 procedures by shortening or imposing short time frames for the process. The Government claims that these proposals aim to reduce delays in 就上述建議，律師會注意到，根據保安局提 the screening process, and improve the procedures and the handling of 供的統計數字，非華裔非法入境者及免遣返 appeals. 聲請人數目已大幅下降(自從政府上次檢討處 理免遣返聲請的策略)。因此，現行建議縮短 In respect of the above proposals, the Law Society notes that, according 審核程序或在有關人士可被遣離後設置限制 to the statistics provided by the Security Bureau, the number of non- 的理由並不充分。 ethnic Chinese illegal immigrants and non-refoulement claims have dropped significantly (since the Government’s latest review of the 在2019年2月向保安局提交的意見書中，律 strategy of handling non-refoulement claims). As such, the current 師會指出現行審核制度的問題。除了對擬議 proposals to shorten the screening process or place a limitation after a 的法例修訂發表意見外，我們建議當局考慮 person becomes liable to removal could not be justified. 以非立法方式改善審核機制。我們要求公佈 酷刑聲請上訴委員會/免遣返聲請呈請辦事 In a submission filed with the Security Bureau in February 2019, the Law 處經刪改後的決定，並提供如原籍國和報告 Society pointed out the problems with the current screening regime. 員報告等資料，以提高透明度和問責制。此 Apart from commenting on the proposed legislative amendments, we 外，有關當局亦應公開有關為免遣返聲請人 suggested the Bureau to consider non-legislative enhancements to 提供公費法律支援試驗計劃的資料和統計數 improve the screening mechanism. We also asked that the decisions 字，以便我們評估試驗計劃的運作。 by the Torture Claim Appeal Board / Non-Refoulement Claims Petition Office be made public (on a redacted basis), and that information such 上述意見書的全文可瀏覽： as those Country of Origin Information and rapporteur reports should http://www.hklawsoc.org.hk/pub_e/news/ be provided. These serve to enhance transparency and accountability. submissions/20190226.pdf Information and statistics should also be made available on the Pilot Scheme for Provision of Publicly-funded Legal Assistance for Non- 律師會期待就此事與保安局進一步討論。 refoulement Claimants, in order for us to assess how the pilot scheme has been operating.
A copy of the above submission appears at http://www.hklawsoc.org.hk/pub_e/news/submissions/20190226.pdf
The Law Society looks forward to be engaged with the Security Bureau for further discussion on the matter.
www.hk-lawyer.org 13 • May 2019
Face to Face with Professor Lutz-Christian Wolff Incoming Dean, Faculty of Law, The Chinese University of Hong Kong
Lutz-Christian Wolff is no stranger to Hong Kong’s legal landscape, as he has lived and worked in the city since 1999. Having been with The Chinese University of Hong Kong’s Faculty of Law since its establishment in 2005, Wolff will take over as its Dean in September. In this interview with the Hong Kong Lawyer, Wolff talks about what drew him to China (and Hong Kong in particular), his plans for his new role, and the state of legal education in Hong Kong.
By Ranajit Dam
ducation and China are two of Professor Lutz-Christian Moving to Hong Kong Wolff’s obvious passions. He has now been in academia Having completed his second PhD, Wolff moved into private for more than two decades, in Germany and later a practice again, his work with an international law firm shorter stint at City University of Hong Kong (CityU) eventually bringing him to Hong Kong in 1999. His return to Epreceding a longer association with The Chinese University of academia came a few years later. “After some time at CityU, Hong Kong (CUHK). At CUHK, he helped found the Faculty of I became a founding member of the CUHK Faculty of Law Law (then the School of Law) and served in a number of different in 2005,” says Wolff. “I have served our Faculty amongst capacities since. In September, he will take over as the Dean, others, as programme director of three LLM programmes, as succeeding Professor Christopher Gane, who has been in the Associate Dean and as Acting Dean on various occasions.” role since 2011. Promoted to the rank of chair professor in 2008, Wolff says he was “fortunate” to receive several teaching and research Wolff’s interest in China, however, goes back to his student days. prizes, including the CUHK University Education Award. “In “I was raised and have studied law in Germany,” he says. “I was 2014 CUHK acknowledged my contributions to legal research lucky that my university offered special language training for and education by awarding me the Wei Lun Professorship of law students. I studied Chinese because a friend of my father, Law. For the last five years I have served as Dean of the CUHK a professor of economics, said that Chinese would open every Graduate School being in charge of the management of over door in the future. This was in 1980 and that professor was 12,000 postgraduate students and overseeing all postgraduate truly visionary. After my second year of law studies in Germany, programmes across faculties.” I spent one year at Fudan University in Shanghai and it was then when I really fell in love with China.” Even though he moved to Hong Kong in 1999, Wolff’s desire to live and work in the city dates back to much earlier. “I visited After graduating in 1987, Wolff spent some months in Taiwan, Hong Kong for the first time during a trip from Shanghai over honing his Chinese-language skills, and also starting work on Christmas 1983,” he recounts. “I remember one evening when his first PhD covering the introduction of the labour contract law I was sitting at the Tsim Sha Tsui harborfront. While taking in system on the Chinese mainland. “Practical training, research Hong Kong Island’s impressive skyline, it became clear to me and work stays in Düsseldorf, Germany (1988-1989, 1990-1991), that I really wanted to live and work at this fascinating place. Beijing (1988-1989), New York (1990) followed until I started It took me some time, but in 1999 I was finally able to make my first job as associate with one of the major law firms in the move to Hong Kong, and I have been happy about this Germany,” recalls Wolff. “After only two years I returned to my decision for every single day of the past twenty years that I have alma mater to obtain my second PhD – with a thesis on the spent here. Since my academic and practical work focuses on doctrinal similarities of contract law, property law and the law international and Chinese business law, comparative law and of unjust enrichment.” private international law, Hong Kong is an ideal place for me.”
14 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • COVER STORY 封面專題
www.hk-lawyer.org 15 • May 2019
Indeed, much of Wolff’s career has been spent straddling different worlds – academia and the legal profession. A German Attorney-at-Law (Rechtsanwalt) since 1991, he has also held a practicing certificate as a solicitor of England & Wales since 2004. “My practical work has inspired my research and is very important for my teaching which – I believe – students appreciate a lot,” shares Wolff. “I am still involved in some consultancy work, but the focus of my professional life has clearly shifted to academia since I joined CUHK. I once heard that ‘success is where you enjoy,’ and it is not only from this point of view that I feel that I am extremely successful. I love to work with our students, I have been able to conduct fascinating research and in my various administrative capacities I am extremely grateful for having been given the chance to work with highly skilled and motivated colleagues at different levels of CUHK.”
Building CUHK Law from Scratch Among Wolff’s fondest memories of his time in Hong Kong are the heady days of 2005, when he was involved in establishing the CUHK Faculty of Law. “Back then, there were eight offices around a construction site, which was to become our first boardroom,” he recalls. “We had one year to create all programmes, to build the CUHK Graduate Law Center in the Bank of America Tower in Central, to recruit in terms of ‘international outlook.’ In the role regionally and internationally. more colleagues and last but not least last Research Assessment Exercise, we In particular, China’s Belt and Road to attract potential students to join us emerged as the top law school in Hong initiative and the Greater Bay Area plan one year later. Those were tough times, Kong. Ranking results may of course offer lots of opportunities in this regard. with thick layers of dust on our desks change year by year. But, in fact we do It is only natural to make our globally every morning, constant noise from the have great teaching programmes and recognised expertise in Chinese law even construction works and of course we do research with significant impact. I stronger.” were extremely busy often with email trust that the success of our Faculty discussions until long after midnight.” is recognised locally, regionally and In addition, he says that CUHK Law internationally.” will reinforce its core common law However, all of those inconveniences competencies in areas such as contract, have paid off in the form of a world- Taking CUHK Law to the Next Level tort, property and company law with class institution. “Building a new law Wolff has nothing but praise for the a focus on Hong Kong specifics. school was a fantastic once-in-a-lifetime founding dean Professor Mike McConville “Furthermore, legal issues related to experience. And, we succeeded!” says and the current dean Professor cross-border transactions must play Wolff. “The CUHK Faculty of Law Christopher Gane. “They have been an important role in legal education at is not even 15 years old but already extremely successful in first establishing an international place like Hong Kong. ranked amongst the top 50 of the and then leading the CUHK Faculty of Emerging topics such as LawTech world. According to the Times Higher Law into the post start-up consolidation and RegTech, LGBTI law and China’s Education World University Rankings phase,” he points out. “It is now time for Belt and Road initiative will as well 2018 (Law Subject), we were even No.1 us to assume a more active leadership require our full attention,” says Wolff.
16 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • COVER STORY 封面專題
“I once heard that ‘success is where you enjoy,’ and it is not only from this point of view that I feel that I am extremely successful. I love to work with our students, I have been able to conduct fascinating research and in my various administrative capacities I am extremely grateful for having been given the chance to work with highly skilled and motivated colleagues at different levels of CUHK.”
“And, we are permanently working on developments and not to shy away from technology savvy and demonstrate a the enhancement of our curricula by unconventional approaches to ensure wide array of non-legal skills. Wolff firmly adding new electives, experimenting that our students understand and are believes law schools in Hong Kong are with innovative teaching methods and able to take full advantage of the evolving ensuring that graduates are primed for improving our skills training modules to features,” he says. success not only in the legal profession, ensure that our students are equipped to but in other sectors as well. “I trust that become future leaders in Hong Kong’s Wolff appreciates that Hong Kong’s the law schools in Hong Kong are doing legal market and beyond.” other two law schools are in the same a very good job in preparing graduates boat, and it is important that the three for the modern legal marketplace,” he Wolff also expects CUHK Law will work well together. “The relationship says. “It must not be forgotten in this increase its knowledge transfer activities amongst the three law schools in Hong context, however, that law graduates to foster the exchange between academia Kong is excellent,” he notes. “We work also have excellent career opportunities and legal practice. “My colleague with colleagues from Kowloon Tong and in non-law sectors and our educational Professor Steven Gallagher and I have Pokfulam regularly on many projects work has in fact created some real been organising a Greater China Legal relating to teaching and research. Of leaders in those fields. Of course, we can History seminar series for the last five course, the three law schools are not do even better. For example, as already years,” he says. “The series has become only working together, we are also mentioned, in times of globalisation a real household name with often more competing with each other. I believe that even more emphasis has to be placed than 150 participants many of whom this competition is healthy and – in my on legal aspects related to cross-border from private practice. We will enhance eyes – beneficial for the development of legal transactions.” activities of this kind and of course legal education in Hong Kong.” venture also into more practical topics.” Wolff is appreciative of the fact that at Nurturing Future Lawyers least 50 percent of a practicing lawyer’s Keeping Up with Developments The legal marketplace today is vastly work is non-law related, and concerns While he sets these plans into motion, different from what it was a generation, issues like management, budgeting Wolff appreciates that the road ahead or even a decade ago. Lawyers are and business development. “Related won’t be entirely smooth. “The biggest required to be increasingly versatile, non-law skills are therefore essential challenge for me as Dean will be the rapid change that legal markets are currently encountering,” he notes. “My Faculty and I – and in fact any law school in the world – have to ensure that legal education and research keep up with these developments. This is not an easy task. For example, the increasing digitisation of the business world and the globalisation of the world’s economies demand swift and appropriate responses from lawmakers, the legal profession and last but not least also the providers of legal education.”
At the same time law and legal services are also becoming increasingly digitised and globalised, thus leading to significant changes of the legal landscape, he feels. “In the years to come it will be necessary for us to stay on top of these and other
www.hk-lawyer.org 17 • May 2019
for successful lawyering at all levels and has many advantages as compared, PCLL programme equips our graduates in its different forms,” says Wolff. “As for example, with the German model with the practical knowledge and skills I mentioned earlier, we are constantly where law graduates have to undergo which are needed for a successful career working on the enhancement of the skills two years of practical training during in law,” Wolff says. training modules offered in various forms which they work for judges, prosecutors, at undergraduate and postgraduate administrative bodies and private law Advice to Prospective Law Students level. I have rather concrete plans how firms followed by the second state So what advice does Wolff have for those to move things forward in order to examination. The one-year PCLL considering the study of law? “Most align our curricula with practical needs programme is much more focused and importantly, they must understand that for the benefit of our students and allows students to select their area of law is not just a(nother) tool to make ultimately their future employers as well professional specialisation right after money. In contrast, law is key to protect as the society as such. I will assume the graduation,” says Wolff. the core values of every society and Deanship of the CUHK Faculty of Law ultimately to achieve justice. Second, in September and we will start with the He adds that he feels that CUHK’s own law studies and the work as a lawyer are implementation of these plans straight PCLL programme is very strong and its not always a walk in the park. However, away.” PCLL graduates leave the Faculty well- aspiring law students can rest assured prepared for legal practice. “Our PCLL that nothing (nothing!) can be more About the PCLL courses are taught by full-time teachers exciting than engaging with law in its He also weighs in on the current who are experienced practitioners. The different facets. Finally, it is important to PCLL programme, which qualifies law PCLL curriculum entails lots of in-class join only the best school and - I have to graduates before they can become simulations and skills-training modules. say - this would of course be the CUHK trainee solicitors or pupil barristers. “The While it stands to reason that nothing can Faculty of Law,” says Wolff with a broad PCLL programme delivery mode as such replace the legal training on the job, our smile.
18 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • COVER STORY 封面專題 專訪 鄔楓教授 香港中文大學法律學院候任院長
鄔楓教授自1999年起在香港生活和工作，對香港的法律環境並不陌生。他於 2005年加入香港中文大學，是法律學院創院成員之一，將於9月接任院長一職。 在接受《香港律師》專訪時，鄔楓教授談到什麼吸引他來中國(特別是香港)工作、 對新崗位的計劃以及香港的法律教育狀況。
撰文：Ranajit Dam
教育和中國是鄔楓教授的兩大志 趣。他投身學術事業已逾20年，包 括曾於德國學術機構工作，短暫任 教香港城市大學，及後來轉往香港 中文大學(中大)，協助創立法律學 院，並擔任過許多不同職位。他將 於9 月出任中大法律學院院長，接替 自2011年起擔任院長的Christopher Gane教授。
鄔楓教授對中國的興趣可追溯至學 生時代。「我在德國成長和修讀法 律。幸運的是，我就讀的大學為法 律學生提供特別機會學習不同語 言，而我選擇了學習中文，因為父 親的一位經濟學教授友人說，學習 中文將在未來開啟無盡機遇。當時 是1980年，那位教授真的很有遠 見。在德國修讀兩年法律後，我前 往上海復旦大學進修了一年，自那 時起我就真的愛上了中國。」 回到了母校(University of Passau, 加入中大成為法律學院的創始成 1987年畢業後，鄔楓教授在台灣 Germany)，繼續修讀第二個博士學 員。我在法律學院擔任過三個法律 渡過了幾個月，進一步提升中文 位，論文的主題是合同法、財產法 碩士課程的課程主任、副院長和署 能力。同時開始修讀第一個博士學 和不當得益的理論相似性。」 理院長等多個職位。」鄔楓教授在 位，研究中國大陸勞動合同法律 2008年晉升為講座教授，並曾獲 制度。鄔楓教授憶述：「我在德國 移居香港 得多個教學和研究獎項，包括中大 杜塞爾多夫(1988-1989，1990- 完成了第二個博士學位後，他再次 博文教學獎。「2014年，我獲中 1991)，北京(1988-1989)和紐約 私人執業，在一間國際律師行任 大授予偉倫法律學講座教授名銜， (1990)等地受訓、工作和從事學 職律師，並於1999年調派來港工 肯定了我對法律研究和教育的貢 術研究。之後在德國一間大型律師 作。幾年後他回到學術界。「在城 獻。在過去5年，我一直擔任中大 行擔任全職律師。兩年後，我又 大任教一段時間後，我於2005年 研究院院長，負責管理大學各學院
www.hk-lawyer.org 19 • May 2019
「我曾聽過『能做喜歡的事便是成功』，以此來看，我覺得自 己非常成功，因為我熱愛和學生一起工作；我能夠進行令人著 迷的研究；在大學擔任各項主要行政職務時，我慶幸能與一眾 能幹積極的同事合作。」
逾12,000多名研究生及其課程發展 種種不便帶來的回報，便是成立了 Gallagher教授和我在過去5年舉辦了 事務。」 一所世界一流的法律學院。鄔楓教 大中華區法律史系列研討會。該系 授說：「建立一所新的法律學院， 列已經廣為人知，每次研討會參與 儘管在1999年才來港，但鄔楓教 是個一生難求、極其美好的經驗， 者往往超過150人，當中許多是私人 授其實一早已有意在香港生活和工 而我們成功了！中大法律學院創立 執業者。我們會多辦這類活動，當 作。他憶述：「我在1983年聖誕 至今不足15年，但排名早已躋身 然亦會嘗試加入和業界關係更緊密 期間從上海第一次來港。我記得， 世界前50名。根據2018年泰晤士 及更實用的內容，與時並進。」 有一天晚上我坐在尖沙咀海濱，欣 報高等教育世界大學排名：法律科 賞港島壯麗夜景，自那時起，我就 目，我們在『國際視野』方面名列 緊貼發展 清楚知道自己想在這個迷人的地方 前茅。在上回的香港研究評審工作 鄔楓教授會把這些計劃付諸實行， 生活和工作。在1999年，我終於能 (Hong Kong Research Assessment 亦明白前路不會暢通無阻。他指 夠移居香港，過去20年，每天我都 Exercise)中，我們位列香港三家法律 出：「作為下任院長，我面對的最 慶幸作出了這個決定。我的學術和 學院第一。各種各樣的排名結果當 大挑戰是法律市場瞬息萬變。中大 執業工作主要集中在國際和中國商 然可能年年不同，但我們的教學質 法律學院和我本人(其實世界上任 法、比較法和國際私法，在這方面 素卓越，研究亦具有重大影響。我 何法律學院也是)都必須確保法律 香港確實是個理想的工作地方。」 相信學院的成就在本地、區域和國 教育和研究能夠跟上社會和經濟的 際上都獲得認可。」 迅速發展。此事殊為不易，例如， 事實上，鄔楓教授的職業生涯一直 商業世界日益數碼化和世界經濟全 橫跨不同的範疇：學術界和法律 領帶中大法律學院更上一層樓 球化，立法者、法律專業人士及法 界。他自1991年起擔任德國律師 鄔楓教授對首任院長Mike McConville 律教育提供者必須迅速和適當地回 (Rechtsanwalt)，自2004年獲英 教授及現任院長Christopher Gane教 應。」 格蘭和威爾斯律師執業證書。「我 授讚不絕口。「兩位院長在創立和 的執業經驗啟發了研究工作，並對 領導中大法律學院迅速進入鞏固階 他認為，法律和法律服務亦日益數 教學工作非常重要，相信學生們 段功不可沒。現在是我們在區域和 碼化和全球化，導致法律環境發生 亦非常欣賞這一點。我仍然有參與 國際上發揮更積極領導作用之時， 重大變化。他說：「未來我們必須 一些顧問工作，但自從加入中大 特別是一帶一路和大灣區規劃提供 能把握時勢發展，不能因循守舊， 以來，事業重心顯然已轉移到學術 了很多機會，我們在中國法律領域 確保學生能緊貼時代脈搏，理解並 界。我曾聽過『能做喜歡的事便是 的成就獲全球公認，自然要充分發 充分利用不斷演進的環境帶來的機 成功』，以此來看，我覺得自己非 揮所長。」 遇。」 常成功，因為我熱愛和學生一起工 作；我能夠進行令人著迷的研究； 此外，他表示，中大將進一步鞏固 鄔楓教授認為，香港三間法律學院 在大學擔任各項主要行政職務時， 在合同、侵權，財產及公司法等普 應同舟共濟。他指出：「香港三間 我慶幸能與一眾能幹積極的同事合 通法核心领域的實力，尤其專注香 法律學院的關係非常良好。我們定 作。」 港的特殊情況。「此外，在香港這 期與九龍塘及薄扶林的同事合作參 樣國際化的城市，與跨境交易有關 與教學及研究項目。當然，三間法 創立中大法律學院 的法律問題是法律教育的重要課 律學院除了合作，也在互相競爭， 鄔楓教授在香港最美好的回憶之 題。其他的新課題，如法律科技和 但我相信這是良性競爭，有利香港 一，是2005年參與創立中大法律 監管科技、LGBTI法律和一帶一路法 法律教育的發展。」 學院。他憶述：「那時，有八個辦 律問題，也需要加倍關注。此外， 公室設於將建成我們首個會議室的 我們通過增加選修科目，嘗試創新 培育未來律師 工地四周。我們須在短短一年間設 的教學方法和改善技能培訓，不斷 現今法律市場與上一代，甚至10年 立所有課程、在中環美國銀行中心 努力提升課程水準，確保學生有能 前截然不同。律師必須多才多藝、 成立法律學院研究生部、招募新同 力成為香港法律市場及其他範疇與 精通科技，並展示出廣泛的法律領 事、招收首屆學生於一年後入學。 領域的未來領導者。」 域以外的技能。鄔楓教授堅信，香 那是個艱辛時期，我們的辦公桌每 港的法律學院畢業生不但要能在法 天都積著厚厚的灰塵，建築工程不 鄔楓教授期望中大將會增加更多知 律專業方面有出色表現，在其他方 斷發出噪音，工作非常忙碌，經常 識轉移活動，以促進學術界和法律 面亦要取得成功。他說：「我相信 用電郵處理事務至夜深。」 界之間的交流。「我的同事Steven 香港的法律學院能為現代法律市場
20 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • COVER STORY 封面專題
培育畢業生，但不能忘記，法律畢 月上任中大法律學院院長一職，屆 教師授課。PCLL課程包含大量的課 業生在法律行業以外也有很好的就 時會立即開始落實這些計劃。」 堂模擬和技能培訓元素。雖然在職 業機會，而事實上，我們的教育工 法律培訓難以取代，但我們的PCLL 作已為其他行業培育了領導者。當 有關PCLL課程 課程為畢業生提供法律職業所需的 然，我們可以做得更好。例如，在 法律畢業生完成PCLL課程後可成為 實踐知識和技能訓練。」 全球化年代，我們必須更重視與跨 實習律師或實習大律師。鄔楓教授亦 境法律交易有關的法律問題。」 相當重視目前的PCLL課程，「PCLL 寄語未來法律學生 課程的模式與其他模式相比具有許多 對考慮修讀法律的學生，鄔楓教授 他明白執業律師的工作中，最少 優勢，例如在德國模式下，法律畢業 有什麼建議呢？「最重要是明白法 50%與法律並無直接關係，而是廣 生必須接受兩年實習培訓，在此期 律不僅是賺錢的工具。相反，法律 泛涉及管理、財務預算和業務發展 間，他們為法官、檢察官在行政機構 是保護社會核心價值、實踐公義的 等領域。「因此，法律領域以外的 和私人律師行工作，然後再進行第二 關鍵。其次，法律研究和律師的工 相關技能對各級律師均至為重要。 次國家級考試。而為期一年的PCLL 作並不總是輕易而舉，但具有抱負 正如我剛才提到，我們一直致力提 課程則更加專注，學生可以在畢業後 的法律學生可以放心，沒有什麼比 高本科生和研究生課程的各項技 立即選擇專業領域。」 在精彩多元、色彩繽紛的法律世界 能培訓元素。我已有相當具體的計 中翱翔更令人興奮。最後，加入最 劃，推動課程發展，令課程更能切 他補充說，中大的PCLL課程為畢業 好的學院也很重要，而我必須說(面 合日新月異的實際需要，為學生、 生投身法律執業作好充分準備。「 帶微笑)，這當然是香港中文大學法 未來僱主和社會帶來裨益。我將在9 我們的PCLL課程由經驗豐富的全職 律學院。」
www.hk-lawyer.org 21 • May 2019
LAW SOCIETY NEWS 律師會新聞
President promoted the Hong Kong legal Apart from meetings with relevant government officials, local business leaders and chambers of commerce, visits to local development system and legal services to the local projects for business exchanges and to receive updates on the current economic and investment environments of the two countries delegates during the trip. were also arranged. 彭會長向當地代表推廣香港的法律制度 除了與當地相關政府官員、商界領袖和商會會面外，代表團成員亦獲安排參觀當地的發展項目，了解兩國經濟和投資環 和服務。 境的最新情況。
Hong Kong Business and Professional 香港工商及專業界別代 Delegation to Georgia and Hungary 表團訪問格魯吉亞和匈
At the invitation of the Commerce and Economic Development Bureau 牙利 of the HKSAR Government, President Melissa Pang joined the Hong Kong Business and Professional Delegation to Georgia and Hungary 應香港特別行政區政府商務及經濟發展局的邀 together with more than 30 head delegates from various businesses 請，會長彭韻僖律師參與了香港工商及專業界 and professional sectors as well as representatives of start-ups from 18 別代表團，與30多位來自不同工商和專業界 to 23 March to explore and capitalise on the opportunities in these two 別，以及初創企業的代表，於3月18日至23日 countries arising from the Belt and Road Initiative. 期間到訪格魯吉亞和匈牙利，探索和把握「一 帶一路」倡議下這兩個國家帶來的機遇。 The seminar cum networking dinner titled “Hong Kong IN: Exploring New Business Opportunities” jointly organised by the HKSAR Government and 此行的其中一個重點活動是由香港特區政府和 HKTDC in Tbilisi, Georgia on 18 March was one of the highlights of the trip. 香港貿易發展局於3月18日在格魯吉亞第比利斯 Ms Pang was invited to be one of the speakers to share with the delegates 聯合舉辦的「由香港進─探索新機遇」研討會 the core competencies of Hong Kong legal services and how Hong Kong 暨交流晚宴。彭會長應邀在研討會上和與會者 legal professionals can assist the Georgian enterprises in their business 分享香港法律服務的主要優勢，以及香港法律 investments. 專業人士可如何協助格魯吉亞企業的商業投資。
22 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • LAW SOCIETY NEWS 律師會新聞
Riding on this opportunity, Ms Pang also met with the representatives of 彭會長亦藉此行與格魯吉亞律師協會和匈牙 the Georgian Bar Association and Hungarian Bar Association to renew 利律師協會的代表會面，重塑彼此友誼和討 friendship and discuss the possibility of future collaboration. 論未來合作的可能性。
The Law Society will continue our effort in exploring ways to foster 律師會將繼續努力與世界各地律師協會探索 collaboration with lawyers associations around the world in order to 更多的合作方式，令會員可充分掌握「一帶 maximise the opportunities arising from the Belt and Road Initiative for 一路」倡議所帶來的機遇。 our members.
Delegation of the Ministry of Justice visited the Law Society. 司法部訪問律師會。
Mainland Delegations Visit the 內地代表團訪問律師會
Law Society 律師會於3月接待了多個來自內地的 代表團。其中，四川省律師協會會長 The Law Society received a number of delegations from the Mainland in March. 程守太律師兩度訪問律師會，與副會 Mr Cheng Shoutai, President of Sichuan Lawyers Association visited the Law 長陳澤銘律師等代表討論兩會之間的 Society twice and discussed with Mr CM Chan, Vice President of the Law 交流合作方案。青島市律師協會的投 Society, and other representatives on the future collaborations between the 融資專業委員會代表團，以及由刑事 two organisations. The delegation of the Investment and Financing Committee 專業委員會和會員服務專門委員會組 of the Qingdao Lawyers Association, as well as the Criminal Professional 成的代表團，亦先後來訪，分別就香 Committee and the Member Services Committee of the Association also 港法律服務概況、兩地法律業務的合 visited the Law Society to exchange views on Hong Kong legal services, as well 作、雙方的會員服務工作等議題進行 as the cooperation between legal professions and member services in the two 交流。 places. 另外，律師會亦於3月28日接待了由中 The Law Society also received a delegation from the Ministry of Justice 華人民共和國司法部副部長熊選國帶領 led by Mr Xiong Xuanguo, Vice Minister of Justice of the People’s Republic 的司法部代表團。出席的律師會代表包 of China on 28 March. Law Society representatives attended the meeting 括會長彭韻僖律師、副會長黎雅明律師 included President Melissa Pang, Vice Presidents Amirali Nasir and CM Chan, 和陳澤銘律師、前會長蘇紹聰律師和熊 Past Presidents Thomas So and Stephen Hung, Council members Jonathan 運信律師、理事羅彰南律師和莊偉倫律 Ross and Warren Ganesh, Secretary General Heidi Chu, as well as the Vice 師、秘書長朱潔冰律師，以及多位大中 Chairmen and members of the Greater China Legal Affairs Committee. The 華法律事務委員會的副主席及委員。雙 parties exchanged views on the legal systems and the development of the 方就兩地的法律系統及法律服務業的發 legal services industry in Hong Kong and the Mainland. 展概況進行交流。
www.hk-lawyer.org 23 • May 2019
Lectures for Peking University Law School
The Law Society is organising a series of lectures under the theme “An Introduction to Legal Services and Risk Management for Cross-border Transactions” for Peking University Law School from March to June, covering topics such as cross-border investment and international commercial dispute resolution for undergraduate and post-graduate law students. The first two lectures hosted by Council member Careen Wong and Mr Soon Chin Yeoh completed on 30 March at Peking University were well-received by the students. The Law Society also signed an agreement with Peking University Law School on 10 April to promote mutual exchanges and cooperation. Ms Careen Wong teaching at Peking University Law School. 為北京大學法學院學生授課 黃巧欣律師在北京大學法學院授課。
律師會於今年3月至6月期間，為北京大學法學院安排一系列「跨境法律服務與風險管理：跨境律師入門」課程，爲法 學院的本科生及碩士生講授跨境投資及國際商事爭議解決等課題。首兩節課堂已於3月30日在北京大學完成，兩位導 師分別為理事黃巧欣律師和楊順真律師，學生們均表現投入和積極。律師會亦於4月10日與北京大學法學院簽署合作 協議，促進雙方交流和合作。
Seminar by Office of the Commissioner of the 外交部駐港特派 Ministry of Foreign Affairs 員公署講座
Under the arrangement of the Public Policy Committee, the Office of the Commissioner of 在公共政策委員會的安排 the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China in the Hong Kong Special 下，中華人民共和國外交部 Administrative Region organised a seminar entitled “China’s Diplomacy – Peaceful 駐香港特別行政區特派員公 Development, Cooperation, Mutual Benefits” on 7 March, which attracted more than 60 署於3月7日舉辦了一場題為 members in attending the event. Commissioner Xie Feng gave a detailed introduction 「中國特色大國外交 – 和 to China’s diplomatic strategy, China’s latest diplomatic situation, relevant opportunities 平發展、合作共贏、構建人 and challenges, and the roles Hong Kong lawyers can play in international development 類命運共同體」的研討會， initiatives, such as the Belt and Road Initiative. 共吸引逾60名律師會會員出 席。當日，謝峰特派員詳細 介紹了中國的外交策略，分 析了中國的最新外交形勢及 相關的機遇和挑戰，以及香 港律師可以在「一帶一路」 倡議等國際性發展項目中所 扮演的角色。
Members of the Law Society attended the seminar at the Office of the Commissioner of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. 律師會會員出席公署舉行的講座。
24 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • LAW SOCIETY NEWS 律師會新聞
The Law Society and the Hong Kong 律師會及香港法律專業 Academy of Law 學會
The Law Society (“Society”) and Hong Kong Academy of Law (“Academy”) 律師會及香港法律專業學會於3月舉辦 organised a total of 25 seminars in March with a total of 1,251 participants. 了合共25場講座，吸引了共1,251人出 席。 One of the 25 seminars was “From Internet Investigation to Digital Forensic” held on 1 March. The seminar discussed how technical 其中一場是3月1日舉行的「從互聯網調查到 investigators would conduct investigations and the proper way to 數碼取證」講座。講座討論了科技調查員如 preserve digital evidence in different stages through the illustration 何進行調查及透過調查模式來說明在不同階 of the investigative model. The speakers were Mr. Michael Kwan, CEO 段保存數碼證據的正確方法。講者是亞太互 of the Asia Pacific Internet Centre Limited and Mr. Alan Chiu, Member 聯網中心有限公司首席執行官關煜群博士及 of the InnoTech Committee of the Society. The seminar attracted 72 律師會創科委員會成員趙之威律師。講座吸 participants. 引了72名人士出席。
The Society organised two seminars entitled “Trying Corporate Actors 律師會亦於3月12日與香港會計師公會及香 – a Critique of Deferred Prosecution Agreements (“DPAs”)” (“first 港特許秘書公會合辦了兩場講座，題目分 seminar”) and “The Misuse of Corporate Vehicles: Concealing (and 別為「審訊企業分子–批判美國延後檢控 Revealing) Beneficial Ownership” (“second seminar”) jointly with the 協議(DPAs)」(第一場講座)和「濫用法團 Hong Kong Institute of Certified Public Accountants and The Hong 作投資工具的個人客戶：隱瞞和揭露實益 Kong Institute of Chartered Secretaries on 12 March. The first seminar 的擁有權」(第二場講座)。第一場講座討論 discussed the use of DPAs in the U.K. and the proposed scheme of DPAs 了在英國使用DPAs的情況和澳洲的DPAs in Australia, and the relationship between DPAs and criminal liability. 擬議計劃，及DPAs與刑事責任之間的關 The second seminar discussed the recommendations of the Financial 係。第二場講座討論了財務行動特別組織 Action Task Force (FATF) to combat the misuse of corporate vehicles and (FATF)打擊濫用法團作投資工具的個人客 the transparency initiatives adopted in the European Union, Australia 戶的建議及歐盟、澳洲和香港採取的透明 and Hong Kong. 措施。
Professor Liz Campbell, Francine McNiff Chair of Criminal Jurisprudence, 講者為澳洲蒙納士大學法律學院Francine Faculty of Law, Monash University, Australia was the speaker of the McNiff刑法學首席講師Liz Campbell教授。香 seminars. Professor C.K. Low, Associate Professor in Corporate Law, 港中文大學商學院公司法律劉殖強副教授擔 CUHK Business School was the moderator of the first seminar. The two 任第一場講座的主持人。兩場講座共吸引了 seminars attracted a total of 280 participants. 280名人士出席。
Mr. Alan Chiu, Member of InnoTech Committee, Law Society of Hong Kong (left) and Professor Liz Campbell, Francine McNiff Chair of Criminal Jurisprudence, Faculty of Mr. Michael Kwan, CEO, Asia Pacific Internet Centre Limited (right) Law, Monash University, Australia (left) and Professor C.K. Low, Associate Professor in 律師會創科委員會委成員趙之威律師(左)及亞太互聯網中心有限公司首席執行官 Corporate Law, CUHK Business School, The Chinese University of Hong Kong (right) 關煜群博士(右) 澳洲蒙納士大學法律學院Francine McNiff刑法學首席講師Liz Campbell教授(左)及 香港中文大學商學院公司法律副教授劉殖強先生(右)
www.hk-lawyer.org 25 • May 2019
President Melissa Pang (right) and Vice-President C.M. Chan (left) presented Vice-President Amirali Nasir (fourth from right) introduced the law firm management, while a souvenir to Mr Mungun Batgerel, Consul of Consulate General of Mongolia Council Member Nick Chan (second from right) talked about the Law Society technology roadmap in Hong Kong (middle). at the seminar. 會長彭韻僖律師(右)和副會長陳澤銘律師(左)向蒙古駐香港領事館領事 在研討會上，副會長黎雅明律師(右四)和理事陳曉峰律師(右二)分別介紹了律師行管理和 Mungun Batgerel先生(中)致送紀念品。 律師會的科技路線圖。
Study Tour with 與蒙古律師協會合辦 Mongolian Bar Association 學習團
Exploring new business opportunities for members has always been one of the 為會員探索新商機一直是律師會的重要工 many important tasks of the Law Society. The Law Society signed a Memorandum 作之一。律師會與蒙古律師協會於2017 of Understanding with Mongolian Bar Association (“MBA”) in 2017. To foster 年簽訂了諒解備忘錄，為促進兩地會員之 collaboration and strengthen exchange between our respective members in the 間的合作和交流，兩會於今年開展首次互 two jurisdictions, we launched our first reciprocal study tour this year. 訪學習團。
To kick-off this programme, the Law Society received the MBA delegation 律師會於3月29日接待了蒙古律師協會代表 and organised a half-day joint seminar in Hong Kong for the delegation 團，並為代表團成員及律師會會員在香港舉 and our members on 29 March. Focusing on law firm management and 辦了一個半天的聯合研討會，為此計劃揭 the use of technology in the legal sector, the joint seminar attracted around 開序幕。研討會以律師行管理和科技在法律 50 participants. Visits to the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre 界的應用為主題，吸引了約50名參加者出 and Independent Commission Against Corruption were also arranged for 席。此外，律師會亦安排代表團到訪香港國 the MBA delegates to better understand the arbitration, mediation and 際仲裁中心及廉政公署，讓成員更深入了解 anti-corruption practices in Hong Kong. 香港仲裁、調解及反貪方面的工作。
With the significant rise in the global economy, the Law Society will continue 隨著全球經濟顯著增長，律師會將繼續與 to work closely with the MBA and other overseas lawyers associations to 蒙古律師協會及其他海外律師協會緊密合 provide information exchange platforms and explore business opportunities 作，提供資訊交流平台，為會員探索商 for members, as well as to enhance the status of the local legal profession in 機，並提升本地法律專業在國際法律界的 the international legal arena. 地位。
In-House Lawyers: Sweat & Glory Series 2019 It isn’t all Glitz & Glamour: An Inside Story of the Media and Entertainment Industry
On 27 March, the In-House Lawyers Committee (“IHLC”) organised its first seminar under the In-House Lawyers: Mr. Herbert Kwok (right), Ms. Valda Chan (second from right) and Mr. Edwin Yee (fourth from Sweat & Glory Series in 2019 with the topic “It isn’t right) with IHLC members. all Glitz & Glamour: An Inside Story of the Media and 郭仲安律師(右一)、陳詠鈴律師(右二)及余柱榮律師(右四)與企業律師委員會成員合照。
26 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • LAW SOCIETY NEWS 律師會新聞
Entertainment Industry”. The seminar was well 企業律師的苦與樂2019 attended by over 60 members comprising in-house lawyers from a variety of backgrounds. 閃爍璀璨背後:傳媒和娛樂行業
During the panel discussion, Ms. Valda Chan, Group 內望 General Counsel, Emperor Group, Mr. Herbert Kwok, General Counsel, Media Asia Group Holdings 企業律師委員會於3月27日舉行了「企業律師的苦與樂2019」 Limited, and Mr. Edwin Yee, Senior Vice President & 的首次研討會，題為「閃爍璀璨背後:傳媒和娛樂行業內望」， Regional Counsel, Sony Music Entertainment Asia 吸引了超過60名會員出席，當中包括來自不同背景的企業律師 Inc., shared with us their experience and insights on 會員。 topics including doing business in Mainland China, artiste and celebrity management, and engaging 研討會上，英皇集團集團總法律顧問陳詠鈴律師、寰亞傳 key opinion leaders etc. IHLC would like to express 媒集團有限公司首席法律顧問郭仲安律師及Sony Music its heartfelt thanks to the panelists. Entertainment Asia Inc.亞洲區商務及法律部高級副總裁及區域法 律總監余柱榮律師分享了他們對主題的經驗和見解，包括在內 The 2019 Annual Conference of In-House Lawyers 地開展業務、藝人管理，以及聘請關鍵意見領袖(KOL)等。企業 will be held on 12 June, Wednesday, at the Hong Kong 律師委員會衷心感謝講者的分享。 Convention and Exhibition Centre. Registration is now open. The theme for this year is “Finding the 2019企業律師年會將於6月12日(星期三)在香港會議展覽中心舉 Common Ground”. For enquiries, please contact us 行，現已接受報名。今年年會主題為「尋找共通點」。如有查 on [email protected]. 詢，請電郵至[email protected]與我們聯絡。
Ms Michelle Tsoi, Vice-Chairlady of the Working Group, and Ms Cassandra Wu, Member More than 60 solicitor volunteers and their families and friends participated in the event. of Community Relations Committee, were among the volunteers to support the event. 超過60名律師義工及其親友參加了是此次活動。 工作小組主席蔡頴德律師及社區關係委員會成員胡加婕律師亦加入義工行列。
Home Visit to Elderly 長者家訪活動
With the support of Hong Kong Society of the Aged (“SAGE”), the Community 社區關係委員會轄下的社區講座及服務工 Talks and Service Working Group (“WG”) under the Community Relations 作小組在香港耆康老人福利會的協助下， Committee organised a home visit to the elderly in North Point on 16 March. 於3月16日探訪了北角區的長者，超過60 More than 60 solicitor volunteers and their families and friends put their love 名義工律師及其親友參加了是次活動，將 and caring into action through participating in this event. 愛心和關懷付諸行動。
The volunteers visited 50 households, chatting with the elderly and 義工探訪了50戶長者家庭，與他們聊天並 distributing goodie bags with food items. The volunteers also identified some 送食物福袋。義工們在家訪期間了解長者 special needs of the elderly during the visit and shared their observations 的特別需要，及後轉達給耆康會的社工， with the SAGE for their follow-up. 以便跟進。
The WG would like to express sincere gratitude to the volunteers on their 工作小組衷心的感謝義工們的無私奉獻， devoted service and look forward to seeing more new faces in future events. 並期待於未來的活動見到更多新面孔。
www.hk-lawyer.org 27 • May 2019
President Melissa Pang extended her warmest New Year wishes to all guests. Members on the Roll of Honour, Past Presidents, Council Members and Secretary General proposed a toast to all guests. 彭韻僖會長向來賓送上新年祝 律師會榮譽名冊會員、前會長、理事和秘書長向嘉賓祝酒。 福。
Spring Reception 2019 己亥年新春酒會
In celebration of the beginning of the Year of the Pig, the Law Society’s 為慶祝豬年來臨，律師會於2月21日舉行了己 Spring Reception 2019 was held on 21 February. Over 300 guests and 亥年新春酒會。超過300名嘉賓和律師會會員 members joined this auspicious event, including Chief Justice Geoffrey 在酒會上互送新年祝福，包括終審法院首席 Ma and the Secretary for Justice Teresa Cheng. 法官馬道立法官及律政司司長鄭若驊資深大 律師。 In her remarks, President Melissa Pang said that 2018 was a year filled with transformations, yet it also brought along with more opportunities 彭韻僖會長在致辭時提到，2018年是充滿「 and challenges. Looking forward, the Law Society will continue to explore 轉變」的一年，但同時亦帶來了更多的機遇 new frontiers for members to capture new business opportunities, and to 和挑戰。展望未來，律師會將繼續為會員開 monitor the latest policy development to assist members in capitalising 拓新領域，抓緊商機，並會留意最新的政策 on the opportunities in due course. 發展，以協助會員適時把握機遇。
28 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • LAW SOCIETY NEWS 律師會新聞
“Legal Pioneer” Mentorship Programme: Phase 9 Closing and Phase 10 Opening Ceremony
The “Legal Pioneer” Mentorship Programme has reached its 10th anniversary this year. Organised by the Law Society’s Community Relations Committee, the Phase 9 Closing and Phase 10 Opening Ceremony of the Mentorship Programme was held in Chiang Chen Studio Theatre of the Polytechnic University on 30 March. Over 150 participants including our officiating guest, Law Society members, teachers and students gathered at the event. We were honoured to have Riding on this occasion, a short video showcasing All participants stood thumbs up with their big smiles. Secretary for Justice Teresa Cheng joining students’ masterpiece and snippets of cherished 所有的參與者都豎起大拇 us and delivering an opening address at the memories from the past ten years was presented 指，露出燦爛的笑容。 Ceremony. to the participants and enjoyed by all. Another highlight was the sharing by Council Member The Secretary for Justice, together with Nick Chan on the topic of “Lawyer’s tips for President Melissa Pang presented Certificates Entrepreneurs”. of Appreciation to students and lawyer mentors from the Phase 9 Mentorship Programme in Other guests included CRC Chairman Philip recognition of their contribution. President Wong, CRC Vice-Chairlady Ann Yeung and encouraged students to participate in a variety “Legal Pioneer” Mentorship Programme of activities arranged by the Law Society during Working Group Chairman Nathan Wong from her remark. the Law Society.
www.hk-lawyer.org 29 • May 2019
「法律先鋒」師友計劃第九期結業禮暨 Find your next move with us 第十期啓動禮 We are working on a significant number of roles M&A both in-house and in private practice. Contact us 「法律先鋒」師友計劃今年踏入十週年。律師會於3月30日假香港理工大學 4+Years|Hong Kong 蔣震劇院舉辦了「法律先鋒」師友計劃第九期結業禮暨第十期啓動禮，逾 for a career discussion or to find out about new Hong Kong conglomerate 150位參與者出席是次活動，包括主禮嘉賓、律師會會員、老師及學生。我 with operations in over 30 opportunities across a diverse range of sectors. 們很榮幸邀請到律政司司長鄭若驊資深大律師參與，並在典禮上致開幕辭。 countries seeks an M&A lawyer to join its team in Hong Kong. Excellent opportunity 律政司司長聯同會長彭韻僖律師頒發嘉許狀予第九期師友計劃的學生及律師 DCM/Derivatives for a lawyer within private practice to make a move Data Privacy 導師，以表揚他們的貢獻。彭會長在發言中鼓勵學生積極參與律師會安排的 2-7 Years|Hong Kong in-house and gain exposure to 10+ Years|Hong Kong In-House 各項活動。 A leading Financial Institution global deals. Fluent Chinese is looking for a lawyer to join and English language skills Global luxury retailer seeks its team. You will provide needed. HKL7829 律師會亦製作了一段回顧師友計劃過去十年的精彩短片，展示學生們以往的 transaction management a senior data privacy lawyer services to the MTN, Note, to join its team. You will have 傑作和片段，於活動中播放。另一個亮點是理事陳曉峰律師分享有關創業的 Warrant and Certificate Prime Brokerage extensive experience relating 法律演講。 business within the Global to data privacy, regulatory & Derivatives Council Member Nick Chan delivered an Markets APAC operations. 5-8 Years|Hong Kong compliance matters. Chinese 3-6 Years|Hong Kong Prior experience from an entrepreneurship legal talk to all participants. Bulge bracket bank is language skills not needed. 其他出席嘉賓包括社區關係委員會主席黃永昌律師及副主席楊慕嫦律師，以 international firm/Financial Major PRC bank is looking 理事陳曉峰律師向所有與會者發表了關於創業的 looking for a financial Attractive remuneration on Institution is essential. for a junior to mid-level legal 及「法律先鋒」師友計劃工作小組主席黃世傑律師。 法律講座。 services lawyer to support offer. HKL7079 HKL7850 counsel with transactions its prime brokerage business in Hong Kong. experience in derivatives Prior prime brokerage to join its team. You should experience will be a strong Private Client/Trusts have prior experience from advantage. Those with a 3-7 Years|Hong Kong an international firm or funds, equity or derivatives another well-known financial Unique opportunity for a background will also be institution. Spoken Mandarin lawyer with experience in considered. HKL7844 private client work to join required. HKL7847 an independent wealth management firm. You will advise high net-worth clients Private Litigation in respect of trusts, estate Banking 2-5 Years|Hong Kong planning, succession solutions 8-15 Years|Hong Kong and asset management. Practice Opportunity for a litigation No Chinese language skills Leading Offshore firm is associate to join a top UK required. HKL7655 looking to grow its banking firm in Hong Kong. You and finance team with a will work on a wide range senior hire at either counsel of commercial disputes or partner level. You should Corporate focusing on the financial Funds ideally have prior experience services and fintech 2-5 Years|Hong Kong in an offshore firm and strong NQ-6 Years|Hong Kong industries. Hong Kong client relationships. Excellent The Secretary for Justice and President presented Certificates of Appreciation to students. A Hong Kong firm is looking qualification required and A US firm is looking to hire a level of compensation on offer. 律政司司長及律師會會長向學生頒發嘉許狀。 to add two corporate lawyers Chinese language skills desirable. HKL7804 funds lawyer to join its team in HKL7794 to its team. You will be able to Hong Kong. This role will offer work on a range of corporate exposure to a broad range of M&A and commercial matters funds work advising on private equity funds, hedge funds and Corporate with an established platform US Capital Markets and a set of well-known other closed and open-end 2-4 Years|Hong Kong clientele. Chinese language 4-6 Years|Hong Kong fund structures. You should be NY or E&W qualified. An international law firm is skills will be required. HKL7843 A Wall Street law firm is Mandarin is not essential. looking for a PRC qualified looking to hire a mid-level US HKL7845 associate in Hong Kong. capital markets lawyer to join You should have gained its team in Singapore. This role experience in corporate and will offer an excellent career commercial related matters track and opportunity to grow FCPA from an international law firm or a leading Chinese law Contact Us to find out more the practice. You must be US 2+ Years|Hong Kong firm. Fluency in Mandarin qualified and ideally from a Karishma Khemaney Top tier US firm is seeking and English is essential. peer firm. HKL7849 [email protected] an FCPA lawyer to join its HKL7779 established FCPA/investigations +852 2537 0895 team. You will gain exposure Camilla Worthington to high profile FCPA and [email protected] investigations work. Fluent English and Mandarin language +852 2537 7413 skills essential. You will have Chris Chu gained FCPA experience from a leading law firm. HKL7805 [email protected] +852 2537 7415 The Secretary for Justice, President Melissa Pang, Council Member Nick Chan, CRC Chairman Philip Wong, CRC Vice-Chairlady Ann Yeung and “Legal Pioneer” Mentorship Programme Natalie Seppi LinkedIn WeChat Working Group Chairman Nathan Wong with the members of CRC and the Working Group. [email protected] 律政司司長、彭韻僖會長、理事陳曉峰律師、社區關係委員會主席黃永昌律師及副主席楊慕嫦律師，以及「法律先鋒」師友計劃工作小組主席黃世傑律師與社區關 +852 2537 7408 係委員會及工作小組成員。
30 www.hk-lawyer.org Find your next move with us We are working on a significant number of roles M&A both in-house and in private practice. Contact us 4+Years|Hong Kong for a career discussion or to find out about new Hong Kong conglomerate with operations in over 30 opportunities across a diverse range of sectors. countries seeks an M&A lawyer to join its team in Hong Kong. Excellent opportunity DCM/Derivatives for a lawyer within private 2-7 Years|Hong Kong practice to make a move Data Privacy in-house and gain exposure to 10+ Years|Hong Kong In-House A leading Financial Institution global deals. Fluent Chinese is looking for a lawyer to join and English language skills Global luxury retailer seeks its team. You will provide needed. HKL7829 transaction management a senior data privacy lawyer services to the MTN, Note, to join its team. You will have Warrant and Certificate Prime Brokerage extensive experience relating business within the Global to data privacy, regulatory & Derivatives Markets APAC operations. 5-8 Years|Hong Kong compliance matters. Chinese 3-6 Years|Hong Kong Prior experience from an Bulge bracket bank is language skills not needed. international firm/Financial Major PRC bank is looking looking for a financial Attractive remuneration on Institution is essential. for a junior to mid-level legal services lawyer to support offer. HKL7079 HKL7850 counsel with transactions its prime brokerage business in Hong Kong. experience in derivatives Prior prime brokerage to join its team. You should experience will be a strong Private Client/Trusts have prior experience from advantage. Those with a 3-7 Years|Hong Kong an international firm or funds, equity or derivatives another well-known financial Unique opportunity for a background will also be institution. Spoken Mandarin lawyer with experience in considered. HKL7844 private client work to join required. HKL7847 an independent wealth management firm. You will advise high net-worth clients Private Litigation in respect of trusts, estate Banking 2-5 Years|Hong Kong planning, succession solutions 8-15 Years|Hong Kong and asset management. Practice Opportunity for a litigation No Chinese language skills Leading Offshore firm is associate to join a top UK required. HKL7655 looking to grow its banking firm in Hong Kong. You and finance team with a will work on a wide range senior hire at either counsel of commercial disputes or partner level. You should Corporate focusing on the financial Funds ideally have prior experience services and fintech 2-5 Years|Hong Kong in an offshore firm and strong NQ-6 Years|Hong Kong industries. Hong Kong client relationships. Excellent A Hong Kong firm is looking qualification required and A US firm is looking to hire a level of compensation on offer. to add two corporate lawyers Chinese language skills desirable. HKL7804 funds lawyer to join its team in HKL7794 to its team. You will be able to Hong Kong. This role will offer work on a range of corporate exposure to a broad range of M&A and commercial matters funds work advising on private equity funds, hedge funds and Corporate with an established platform US Capital Markets and a set of well-known other closed and open-end 2-4 Years|Hong Kong clientele. Chinese language 4-6 Years|Hong Kong fund structures. You should be NY or E&W qualified. An international law firm is skills will be required. HKL7843 A Wall Street law firm is Mandarin is not essential. looking for a PRC qualified looking to hire a mid-level US HKL7845 associate in Hong Kong. capital markets lawyer to join You should have gained its team in Singapore. This role experience in corporate and will offer an excellent career commercial related matters track and opportunity to grow FCPA from an international law firm or a leading Chinese law Contact Us to find out more the practice. You must be US 2+ Years|Hong Kong firm. Fluency in Mandarin qualified and ideally from a Karishma Khemaney Top tier US firm is seeking and English is essential. peer firm. HKL7849 [email protected] an FCPA lawyer to join its HKL7779 established FCPA/investigations +852 2537 0895 team. You will gain exposure Camilla Worthington to high profile FCPA and [email protected] investigations work. Fluent English and Mandarin language +852 2537 7413 skills essential. You will have Chris Chu gained FCPA experience from a leading law firm. HKL7805 [email protected] +852 2537 7415 Natalie Seppi LinkedIn WeChat [email protected] +852 2537 7408 • May 2019
Upskirting – Where is the Law to Cover the Offence?
By Morley Chow Seto
The Digital Age and the Rise of case or install a pin-hole camera in Upskirting their shoe. Digital phones equip them In 1999, when Kyocera marketing with an easy-to-use tool to commit executive, Hajimi Kimura introduced the upskirting. The number of upskirting world’s first mobile videophone – The offences has risen at such an alarming VisualPhone VP-210, he said: rate that governments around the world are racing to modernise their laws to “Users can use this phone not only to talk criminalise the behaviour. visually to their counterparts, but also they will be able to use it for business purposes. For many years the Department of Justice For example, if a constructor brings this often had difficulty in identifying the right phone to a site under construction, he can charge for prosecuting upskirting. The show what the site is like to the people at usual charge brought for such criminal Law Reform in Hong Kong headquarters using this phone. So, they conduct is either disorderly conduct in In September 2012 the Law Reform can do business checking the situation a public place under s. 17B of the Public Commission’s Sub-Committee tasked at real time” - http://edition.cnn.com/ Order Ordinance, loitering under s. 160 to review sexual offences published TECH/ptech/9905/18/japan.phonetv/ of the Crimes Ordinance or the common a Consultation Paper recommending law offence of outraging public decency. that “under-the-skirt photography” At the time, little did the world realise Where none of those three charges were should, amongst other intentional acts that the introduction of digital phones appropriate as the offence happened in of a sexual nature, constitute “sexual would be the kernel for one of the most a private setting, a charge of dishonest assault”. In May 2018 the same Sub- prevalent offences in modern society – use of a computer was brought as a last Committee proposed the creation of a upskirting. resort where the photography involved new offence of voyeurism to criminalise the use of a computer. acts of non-consensual observation The concept of “upskirting” is not or visual recording (for example, a new. The 1767 painting The Swing by Whilst this is not a specific law in dealing photograph, videotape, or digital image) Jean-Honore Fragonard, depicts a with the behaviour and there were of another person done for a sexual man looking up a woman’s dress as questions such as whether a digital phone purpose. None of these proposals have she swings from a tree bough. Digital would satisfy the element of “computer” been implemented by the Legislature phones have taken the behavior to a for a time it seemed that Department of and there remains a lacuna in the law new level. Voyeurs no longer conceal Justice had found a temporary solution which in the light of Cheng Ka Yee (below) their hand held video recorder in a brief to the offending behaviour. needs to be urgently addressed.
32 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • CRIMINAL LAW 刑事法
Secretary for Justice v Cheng Ka Yee & been provided to those Defendants. The and sent photographs of the Word Others [2019] HKCFA 9 facts giving rise to the prosecution were file (taken with her mobile phone) This Court of Final Appeal judgment in that:- to two friends by WhatsApp (again April this year has demonstrated the using her mobile phone) problem created by not having a specific (i) the 1st and 2nd Defendants took law to target upskirting. As a result of photographs of the interview All four Defendants were charged with the decision, the deficiency in Hong questions (using their mobile obtaining access to a computer with Kong’s criminal law has resurfaced and phones) and sent the photographs a view to dishonest gain for himself or requires the immediate attention of by WhatsApp to a friend and the 3rd another, contrary to s. 161(1)(c) of the all stakeholders to address what is an Defendant; Crimes Ordinance. The Defendants were affront to (mainly) women occurring on acquitted after trial. The Magistrate’s a daily basis in Hong Kong. (ii) the 3rd Defendant typed up the reasons for acquitting were that: interview questions in a Word file on The Defendants in the case were primary a school desktop computer and sent (i) She had a reasonable doubt that school teachers. The 1st, 2nd and 3rd the file to the 2nd Defendant (by email the teacher in charge had ever Defendants had attended a briefing on the school computer) and another mentioned at the briefing seminar session concerning a school admission friend (using her mobile phone); the need for confidentiality in process involving a competitive interview- relation to the interview questions. based assessment. The interview (iii) the 4th Defendant received the questions and the marking scheme had Word file from the 2nd Defendant (ii) She was not satisfied beyond
www.hk-lawyer.org 33 • May 2019
The Secretary for Justice applied for a certificate to the Court of Final Appeal on a point of law of great and general importance which question was certified as follows:
“Is the actus reus of the offence under section 161(1)(c) of the Crimes Ordinance, Cap 200 restricted to the unauthorized extraction and use of information from a computer”
In giving its judgement in April 2019, the Court of Final Appeal examined the statutory construction of s. 161(1) (c) identifying the central question as being whether the offence created by the section covers the use by a person of their own computer with the requisite intent.
In looking at the text, context and purpose DO NOT UPSKIRT! of the provision, the Court determined that as a matter of language one always “obtains” access to something to which one did not have access before.
The Secretary of Justice argued for a wider construction of s. 161 on the ground that this secured a beneficial public policy. The Court though rejected this argument as it is not the function of the Court to identify a purpose which it thinks would be beneficial (to public policy) and then construe the statute to fit it.
As the 1st, 2nd and 4th Defendants were charged on the basis of using their reasonable doubt that the necessary “… the law as it now stands does not own phones and in the case of the 3rd element of dishonesty had been punish all kinds of unauthorized access Defendant, the Secretary for Justice made out. to computers, it only prohibits the conceded that for the purpose of the unauthorized and dishonest extraction appeal her position was the same as that On review, the Magistrate confirmed and use of information…“ of the other Defendants (ie using her own her decision. Thereafter, the Secretary computer). On the proper construction for Justice appealed by way of case The Judge held that the acts of the of s. 161(1)(c), the Secretary for Justice’s stated. At the appeal hearing, Deputy Respondents were not unauthorised appeal was dismissed. High Court Judge C P Pang raised extractions and use of information the question of whether in law the from a computer. The 1st, 2nd and 4th The Need for Legislation charges against the Defendants were Defendants’ use of their own smartphones England and Wales implemented appropriate, in particular whether their to take photographs and send or receive legislation to make upskirting a criminal acts amounted to the actus reus of photographs by WhatsApp were not offence in February of this year. In “obtaining access to a computer” within unauthorised extractions and use of Scotland, the home of the kilt, legislation the meaning of s. 161(1)(c). In dismissing information from a computer. The 3rd came in in 2010. In the light of Cheng the Secretary for Justice’s appeal, the Defendant’s use of the school desktop Ka Yee there is a real and apparent Judge referred to the case of Li Man Wai computer to create the Word file was not need for the Legislature to act on the v Secretary of Justice (2003) 6 HKCFAR unauthorised and she had not obtained recommendation of the Law Reform 466 [26] and the statement in that or extracted the Word file from the Commission and to bring in legislation judgment that: school’s computer system. in Hong Kong to criminalise upskirting.
34 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • CRIMINAL LAW 刑事法 裙底偷拍–這項罪行 受何法例涵蓋？
作者：Morley Chow Seto
數碼時代與裙底偷拍的出現 當Kyocera 的市場營銷專員 Hajimi Kimura於1999年向全球展示首部流 動視訊電話The VisualPhone VP-210 時，他說：
「用戶不但可使用這部電話與夥伴 進行視像通話，也可將其用在業務 往來上。例如，前往工地的建築工 程人員可將這部電話帶在身上，並 向在總部使用這電話的人員顯示工 地當時的情況，讓他們可實時視察 有關運作。」- http://edition.cnn.com/ TECH/ptech/9905/18/japan.phonetv/
在當時又有誰會料到，數碼電話的 面世，竟成為現今社會最常發生的 一種罪行「裙底偷拍」的主要犯案 工具呢？
「裙底偷看」這觀念非近年才有， “But officers, I was using my OWN phone to 尚-奧諾雷·弗拉戈納爾於1767年 繪畫的「鞦韆」，表現的正是一名 photograph up that person’s skirt.” 女士在樹上盪鞦韆，下面有一名男 士向上望著她所穿的裙子，而這一 電腦，最後的對策便是以不誠實使 數碼影像形式）的行為刑事化。至 舉動今天被數碼電話引往一個新層 用電腦罪提出檢控。 今為止，立法會並未採納任何該等 次。窺淫者現時不再需要將手提攝 建議，而有鑒於Cheng Ka Yee一案 錄機收藏在公事包，或是將針孔相 雖然此等法例並非專門針對該罪 （見下文），現行法例存在一個必 機安放在鞋頭。數碼電話為他們提 行，也有人曾經提出質疑，例如， 須加緊處理的缺口。 供了便捷的裙底偷拍工具。鑒於裙 數碼電話是否可視作「電腦」看 底偷拍罪行大幅上升，各國政府爭 待，以符合這項罪行元素，但律政 Secretary for Justice v Cheng Ka 相修訂其法例，將該等行為列為刑 司看來是找到了一個針對該犯罪行 Yee & Others [2019] HKCFA 9 事罪行。 為的臨時解決方法。 終審法院在今年4月所作的判決，突 顯了在沒有制定任何與裙底偷拍有 多年以來，律政司就裙底偷拍罪行 香港的法律改革 關的法例情況下所產生的問題。基 提出檢控，在尋找適當控罪方面往 2012年9月，法律改革委員會轄 於這項判決，香港刑事法在這方面 往遇到困難。他們針對該罪行提出 下負責檢討性罪行的小組委員會 的不足之處再度浮現，而對於每天 的控罪通常是：《公安條例》第17B 發表了一份諮詢文件，建議「裙底 在香港發生的（主要是）婦女被冒 條下的在公眾地方作出擾亂秩序的 照片」應該和其他與性有關的蓄 犯問題，亟須所有持分者給予即時 行為；《刑事罪行條例》第160條下 意作為一樣，皆可構成「性侵犯」 關注。 的遊蕩罪；或普通法下的作出令公 。2018年5月，該小組委員會建議 眾憤慨的不雅作為。如果該等罪行 新訂一項窺淫罪，將未經同意下為 該案的各名被告人是小學教師。第 是在私人地方發生，上述三種控罪 了性的目的而對另一人進行觀察或 一、第二及第三被告人出席一個與 皆不合適，而有關照片若涉及使用 視像記錄（例如以照片、錄影帶或 學校收生程序有關的簡介會，當中
www.hk-lawyer.org 35 • May 2019
涉及一個以面試為主，競爭十分大 (i) 她合理懷疑負責的教師曾否在簡 照，並透過WhatsApp收發有關照 的入學試評核。各名被告人獲提供 介會中提到該等面試問題需要保 片，並非在未獲授權情況下，從一 其面試問題和評分表，而導致她們 密。 部電腦取出和使用當中的資料。第 被提出檢控的情況是： 三被告人使用學校的桌面電腦設定 (ii) 她不能毫無合理疑點地信納，控 該Word檔案，並非未獲授權，而她 (i) 第一及第二被告人使用自己的手 方已證明該項必須具備的不誠實 亦並沒有從學校的電腦系統中取得 機將面試問題拍下來，再透過 犯罪元素的確存在。 或取出該Word檔案。 WhatsApp將照片發送給一名朋 友及第三被告人； 在覆核過程中，裁判官確認其所作 律政司司長以涉及具有重大而廣泛 的裁決，律政司司長遂以案件呈述 重要性的法律論點作理由，向終審 (ii) 第三被告人使用學校的桌面電 方式提出上訴。在上訴聆訊中，高 法院申請證明，而該獲證明的問題 腦，將面試問題打下來並儲存於 等法院暫委法官彭中屏質疑律政司 為： 一個Word檔案中，然後將該檔 所提出的控罪在法律上是否適當， 案發給第二被告人（透過學校的 尤其是，各被告的行為是否構成第 「在《刑事罪行條例》（第200 電腦以電郵發送）及另一名朋友 161(1)(c)條所指的致罪行為—「 章）第161(1)(c)條下的罪行的致罪 （透過她的手機）； 取用電腦」。在駁回律政司司長的 行為，是否僅限於在未獲授權情況 上訴時，彭中屏法官提述了Li Man 下，從一部電腦取出和使用當中的 (iii) 第四被告人從第二被告人處 Wai v Secretary of Justice (2003) 6 資料？」 收到該Word檔案後，以其手 HKCFAR 466 [26]一案，以及當中 機將該檔案拍下來，並透過 所作的以下評論： 終審法院在2019年4月作出裁決 WhatsApp將有關照片發送給 時，審視了對第161(1)(c)條的法定 兩名朋友（同樣是使用她的手 「…現行法例並不懲罰所有各類未 詮釋，並確認相關核心問題為：該 機）。 獲授權取用電腦的行為，而只是禁 法律條文所訂立的罪行，是否涵蓋 止未獲授權及不誠實地取出和使用 人們具所需意圖使用自己的電腦？ 四名被告人被控觸犯《刑事罪行條 資料…」 例》第161(1)(c)條，亦即是：以使 在查看該條文的內容、語境和目的 其本人或他人不誠實地獲益之目的 法官裁定各答辯人的行為，並非在 後，終審法院裁定從語言的角度 而取用電腦。經審訊後，各被告人 未獲授權情況下，從一部電腦取出 看，人們「取用」某些東西，必然 被判無罪，裁判官裁定她們罪名不 和使用當中的資料。第一、第二及 是指那些東西是他以前從未取得的。 成立的理由是： 第四被告人使用自己的智能手機拍 律政司司長認為應該對第161條作更 寬泛的詮釋，以落實有益的公共政 策。然而，終審法院拒絕接納這一 論點，因為終審法院的職能，並非 要識別一個它認為有益（於公共政 策）的目的，然後以符合該目的之 方式來詮釋相關法規。
由於第一、第二及第四被告人面對 的控罪，是以其使用自身的手機作 基礎，至於第三被告人，律政司司 長同意就該宗上訴而言，第三被 告人的情況與其他被告人相同（即 是她是使用自己的電腦）。在對第 161(1)(c)條的含義作出適當詮釋 後，律政司司長的上訴被駁回。
立法的需要 英格蘭及威爾士已在今年二月 立法，將裙底偷拍行為訂為刑 事罪行，而蘇格蘭（方格褶裙的 起源地）更早於2010年進行立 法。Cheng Ka Yee一案揭示了香港 目前確實在這方面有真正和實際需 要，立法會應根據法律改革委員會 的建議，就裙底偷拍行為的刑事化 進行立法。
36 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • PROFESSION 專業導論
the objectives of the succinct and pithy and nothing at all to elegant or even adequate pleading.
Two or three weeks’ University instruction based on these examples is hopelessly inadequate. The result is that generations of young barristers start out with a set of fundamentally flawed blueprints. Rather How to than proforma pleadings, they should be instructed in the basic principles. Plead Learning how to plead is like the answer to a young musician’s question “How do I get to Carnegie Hall?” Answer “Practice, Your Case practice, practice.” To illustrate the point, as a busy Junior in London Chambers I would do an average of 6 to 7 sets of pleadings every night.
The same judge’s words, though in the context of a Personal Injury case, apply across the board to both High Court and District Court actions:
“High Court ...actions are conducted when they come to trial, by counsel. Counsel are also trained pleaders - or are expected to be, since that is part of their traditional craft...They are required A Pleading Mess in their advocacy to advance the case on the strength of the pleaded case...”
By Neville Sarony QC SC Regrettably, this traditional craft is dying from neglect in Hong Kong. Worse, too many pupil masters perpetuate their “Very, very few solicitors show by counsel, swiftly, efficiently and at a shortcomings on successive generations competence in pleading cases - either lower cost than the going rate in Hong of young counsel. One does not have as Statements of Claim or as Defences. Kong. to look very far for reasons why there They seem to direct themselves to is a long-standing solicitors’ syndrome complicating the events and the issues However, counsel who draft such of thinking “I can do that.” The vicious in as prolix and indigestible a form as pleadings do not have their name on circle of low level competence, delay and possible.” These are the words of Mr. them, the firm of solicitors append their cost means that the opportunities for Justice Seagroatt in Chan Siu Wah v Wu name to the pleading thus circumventing acquiring pleading skills are diminishing Kwok On [HCPI 1123/1997] commenting the requirement that Hong Kong counsel exponentially. Hence the necessity of on the state of affairs in 1997. be instructed in litigious matters. It sending the instructions to London in so is a devious practice which cannot be many instances. The standard of pleadings in Hong Kong condoned but is, nevertheless, entirely in 2019 is still abysmal. As Seagroatt J understandable. Over and above this systemic weakness, put it probably the most powerful force against Why is the standard so abysmally low? the employment of counsel to plead “Proper, sensible and effective pleading The reasons are manifold. cases is Hong Kong’s taxation system. is a skill or art. I rarely see examples of that.” Pleading is one of the subjects taught in Most certainly since the judgment in the PCLL and in some LLB courses too. Chan Siu Wah Taxing Masters have One consequence of this sorry state of I trust I will be forgiven for observing operated to exclude counsel from affairs is that city firms send their cases to that the students appear to be working drafting the pleadings, asserting that England where the pleadings are drafted from aged protocols that owe little to this is a job for solicitors. Even the
www.hk-lawyer.org 37 • May 2019
Legal Aid Department quotes the case as authority for the proposition that it is for solicitors not counsel to draft the pleadings. This upside-down state of affairs is the consequence of Seagroatt J’s unfortunate misuse of one word, ‘settle’. Describing counsel’s responsibilities he said:
“If they settle the pleading they are responsible for it and must shoulder the consequences if that pleading is defective.”
The convention is that by signing the pleading, counsel accepts responsibility for it. There is no room for the absurdity of counsel excusing him or herself by saying that in actuality the pleading was drafted by the instructing solicitor.
The pleading is counsel’s plan of battle, one to be fought on the terms delineated in it.
With respect, the taxing Masters treat “Please don’t decide solely on my pleadings..” the judge’s use of the word “settle” in Chan Siu Wah as ex cathedra, whereas in point of fact it is per incuriam. Since time immemorial, the practice has been of the joys of “the Bear Garden” in the claims. Acquiring the necessary skills is for Junior Counsel to draft the pleadings, Royal Courts of Justice was the ability to time consuming and, in an ideal setting, leading counsel (QCs and SCs) settle the knock on the Practice Master’s door and is best learned in a homogenous, pleadings. This is so basic a professional get two minutes of invaluable advice. properly structured set of chambers tenet that it is truly extraordinary that The Queen’s Bench Masters were drawn where brother and sister barristers assist the misconception has enjoyed such an from practitioners with many years of each other. Sadly, this is another aspect extended life. But perhaps one cannot hands-on experience who brought that largely missing from the Hong Kong Bar. blame the Taxing Masters entirely experience with them onto the bench. because they have grown up in the same The rationale for counsel to draft the system and merely perpetuate Hong In many ways, they were the workhorses pleadings, as the learned judge correctly Kong’s erroneous habit. Nor can one of the judicial system, disposing of pointed out in the same judgment, is blame the Taxing Masters if they accept interlocutory matters with the insight that counsel is held responsible for a Seagroatt J’s word as gospel. Seasoned and expedition born of many years pleading with his or her name on it. practitioners know that it comes from the practice. Seagroatt J’s lapsa lingua would This is why experienced solicitors know Apocrypha. never have acquired the currency it has that any change to a pleading must be acquired if it had come before the likes of approved by counsel who drafted it. In An added layer of confusion arises from Master Jacob or suffered exposure to the this day and age when counsel are just Taxing Masters’ over-rigid interpretation coruscating wit of Master Ritchie. as answerable for their negligence as any of ‘settle’. There are and will continue other professional, it is doubly important. to be cases the complexity or gravity of The art of pleading lies in developing which necessitate the primary pleading the ability to digest a mass of detailed Counsel have to anticipate how the be drafted by leading counsel. It flies in material, winnow out everything pleaded case will impact on their the face of reality to tax leading counsel’s irrelevant and reduce the client’s case to a tribunal, it is no exaggeration to say fee on the basis that the pleading was clear exposition of its substance. Indeed, that many a case has been determined merely settled by them. before the unhappy introduction of lists on the strength of the pleadings, often of issues and skeleton arguments, cases before the judge enters the courtroom. Hong Kong does not have the English used to be contested on the basis of the As more and more applications for leave equivalent of the practice Master. One pleadings which set out the respective to appeal are determined ‘on paper’
38 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • PROFESSION 專業導論
with no oral hearing, so the need for the fee. Any competent judge’s expression incompetent pleaders must be reversed ability to plead a compelling case will will darken when faced with a set of and the drafting placed where it should only increase. pleadings like the libretto to The Ring be, with counsel. The equally necessary Cycle. In almost every case, pleadings corollary is that pleadings be paid for Opposing parties often take the measure answer to the maxim ‘less is more’. properly: that is a two-way stretch, of the other side’s strength or weakness counsel’s fees need to be proportionate by the quality of the pleadings. Ignorance Even when the misconstruction of ‘settle’ and both delivery and payment prompt. and prolixity are sure signposts to a weak has been rectified so that counsel can legal team, all too often concealing a resume their traditional role, solicitors In some respects, the Hong Kong sound case underneath the weight of will need to mend their misspent ways, Bar illumines the administration of verbiage. cease to massacre their own pleadings justice. Multi-racial, multi-lingual, its Instructing counsel to do the pleadings and instruct counsel to draft them as a professional ethics are set at the highest is also one of the fields in which the matter of course. In England, no solicitor level and it provides a phalanx of widely solicitor can, in almost all instances, be would dream of doing the pleadings different fields of expertise. In addition to protected from allegations of negligence when he could get counsel to do them which, it is essentially apolitical, bowing by sheltering behind counsel. for a fraction of what he would charge at neither to fear or favour. In these troubled his hourly rates. times, great responsibility rests on the Once the engine of pleading is restored Bar. It must answer to the needs of the to counsel’s tracks, one example of This critical change needs to be legal community and a major element incompetence that the Bar must excise implemented as a matter of urgency. The of its professional services lies in skillful itself of is the notion that the quality of a Junior Bar is seriously underemployed pleading. At present, too much of this pleading is judged by its length. and under-exercised in the art and this is either being done badly by solicitors vicious circle needs to be broken. Once or the capacity of the Hong Kong Bar is I have seen pleadings which can only have that step is taken, it will be up to the being hollowed out by instructions going been drafted by the yard in the expectation Bar to respond to the challenge. The to London. Balance must be restored, that they would command a stupendous disastrous perpetuation of generations of promptly. 狀書撰寫的亂象
作者：蘇朗年（御用大律師、資深大律師）
「很少事務律師能撰寫達水平的狀 但儘管狀書的草擬工作是由他們負 一代又一代的年青大律師只倚靠一 書（無論是申索陳述書或抗辯書） 責，但狀書上找不到他們的名字。 份存在缺陷的藍圖來啟步。事實 。他們容易把事情和問題弄得冗長 取而代之的，是律師事務所自己的 上，大學應教導學生撰寫狀書的基 複雜，令人難以消化。」這是孫國 名字，目的是為了廻避必須委託香 本原則，而無需緊隨格式。這就好 治法官在Chan Siu Wah v Wu Kwok 港大律師處理訴訟事宜的規定。這 像年青音樂家想知道「如何才能在 On HCPI 1123/1997 一案中，就 種欺瞞做法雖不可取，但卻是完全 卡拉奇音樂廳開演奏會？」一樣， 1997年的情況所作的評論。 可以理解。 其要訣就是不停地「練習！練習！ 練習！」。舉例來說，我在倫敦的 在2019年的今天，此等情況依然 為何有狀書撰寫水平不濟的情況出 大律師事務所擔任初級大律師時， 未見改善。正如孫國治法官所說 現？原因不一而足。 工作十分忙碌，每晚平均須撰寫六 的： 至七套狀書。 撰寫狀書是法學專業證書及若干法 「適當、合理、有效地撰寫狀書， 律學士課程的研習科目。然而，大 孫國治法官所作的上述評論（儘管 既是一門技巧，也是一門藝術，但 學看來只是以陳年的範本作教材， 所涉及的是一宗人身傷害案件）， 我鮮見這些例子。」 完全達不到簡明扼要的要求，更莫 可套用在高等法院及區域法院進行 說作出考究甚或充分的申述。 的訴訟。 有鑒於此，一些city firm將狀書交由 英國的大律師草擬。他們不但工作 使用這些材料作二至三星期的授 「高等法院…的案件在展開審訊 效率高，收費也較香港的低。 課，明顯是有所不足，而後果會是 時，須由大律師作為出庭代表。大
www.hk-lawyer.org 39 • May 2019
律師本身是（或被預期是）曾接受 務律師而非大律師工作範圍的權威 做法。這是一項基本專業規條， 訓練的狀書撰寫人，而該項工作是 依據。這一本末倒置情況，乃孫國 但該等錯誤竟持續了這麼久，確 其傳統技藝的一部分…在訟辯過程 治法官誤用「定稿」一詞所帶來的 實令人費解。也許，我們不應將 中，他須根據所申述理據的強弱來 不幸結果。孫國治法官在談論大律 責任全推給訟費評定官，因他們 提出案情…」 師的責任時稱： 也是在同一制度下孕育出來，並 將存在於香港的錯誤延續下去。 令人遺憾的是，這項傳統技藝在香 「他們若為狀書定稿，便必須對其 所以，即使他們將孫國治法官的 港因備受忽視而日漸消失。更糟的 負責，當中若存在任何問題，便須 說話奉為圭臬，我們亦不必對其 是，許多見習大律師的師父正將其 承擔其後果。」 苛責，而經驗老到的執業者都知 不足之處遺留給一代又一代的年青 道，那些話只是不經之談。 大律師。事務律師為何一直有「我 一般情況下，大律師假如在狀書上 做得到」的想法呢？箇中原因實不 簽了名，便須對其負責，而不能以 由於訟費評定官對「定稿」一詞的 難尋。能力不足、耽擱、費用這一 它們實際上是由委託的事務律師草 解釋過度僵化，以致混淆的情況加 惡性循環，意味著提升狀書撰寫水 擬作為辯解理由。 劇。無論現時或將來，仍會繼續有 平的機會變得更涉茫，亦導致更多 複雜或嚴重的案件，須由首席大 草擬工作流往倫敦的大律師。 狀書乃大律師在一場戰役中的部 律師負責重要的狀書草擬工作，而 署，而該場戰役，須根據當中載明 以首席大律師只替狀書定稿作為理 除了這一系統性問題外，一股不同 的條款來進行。 由，對其費用進行訟費評定，這確 意聘用大律師撰寫狀書的強大力 是與事實相違。 量，很可能是香港的訟費評定制度。 恕我直言，訟費評定官將孫國治 法官在Chan Siu Wah中所使用 香港並沒有任命與英國所任命的類 一點可以肯定的是，自Chan Siu 的「定稿」一詞視作金科玉律， 似的常規聆案官。在英國皇家高等 Wah一案的判決作出後，訟費評定官 但事實上孫國治法官使用這個 法院的「耍熊場所」中，大律師所 開始不同意由大律師草擬狀書，並 詞，只是出於一時大意。由初級 獲得的一份樂趣，是可以敲常規聆 指稱這是屬於事務律師的工作；而 大律師草擬狀書，由首席大律師 案官的門，聽取他們給予兩分鐘的 即便是法律援助處，他們亦開始引 （御用大律師及資深大律師）為 寶貴意見。在皇座法庭的聆案官， 用該案，作為草擬狀書的工作乃事 該狀書定稿，是由來已久的一貫 都是一些具多年實務經驗的執業
40 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • PROFESSION 專業導論
者，他們將所累積的豐富經驗帶到 大律師一旦恢復履行撰寫狀書的職 草擬能力不足的情況扭轉過來，以 皇座法庭來。 務，便須摒除以篇幅長短來衡量狀 免其一代又一代地延續下去，並將 書優劣的陋習。 有關工作交予應肩負此責的人—大 他們在許多方面是司法制度的老黃 律師—來執行。同樣重要的是，大 牛，運用從多年實務經驗所培養出 撰寫長篇累牘的內容，有時只是為 律師的撰寫狀書費用須獲得妥為支 來的察析力處理非正審事宜。孫國 了收取更高昂的費用。英明的法官 付。大律師須適時完成工作，兼適 治法官的一時失言，如果是在有如 面對如The Ring Cycle的劇本一般厚 時獲得支付費用，此乃一個雙向延 Master Jacob般的法官席前，或是 的狀書，定會對此作出嚴厲批評。 伸，二者必須相稱。 在Master Ritchie的睿智前被審視， 幾乎任何時候，撰寫狀書的座右銘 便不會有現時的廣泛流傳情況出現。 都是「少即是多」。 就某些方面而言，香港大律師的工 作是彰顯司法公義。這是一個涉及 撰寫狀書的技巧，在於培養出一種 當「定稿」一詞的誤解獲得糾正， 多種族、多語言的專業，它就各個 能力，將大量詳細資料消化，並將 大律師獲得恢復其傳統職務後，事 不同範疇提供廣泛的專門知識，而 一切不相關的內容排除，從而將當 務律師須修正過往的做法，不再將 當中各成員必須具備最高的道德標 事人的案情濃縮成為對實質內容的 其狀書糟蹋，理所當然地將它交給 準。此外，它基本上並不涉及任何 清晰說明。事實上，在提交爭議點 大律師草擬。英國事務律師的想法 政治，當壓力到來時，它以既不 的列表和論點大綱之前，當事方通 是：如果可以從所收取的法律服務 亢、也不卑的態度來面對。在目前 常會就述明有關要求的狀書提出爭 費用中，運用其中一小部分來聘請 這個紛擾時刻，大律師確實正在 議。要培養所須的技巧可以相當耗 大律師撰寫狀書，又何須自行承擔 擔負著重責。他們須為法律界提供 時，因此最理想的情況，是在同質 這項工作呢？ 滿意的專業法律服務，而高水平的 和經過適當構建，伙伴之間會相互 狀書撰寫技巧，便是其中一個重要 幫助的該等大律師事務所中學習。 作出上述重大變更實為當務之急， 組成部分。在目前，太多此類工作 但遺憾的是，香港的大律師專業中 因初級大律師現時處於嚴重就業不 正由事務律師承擔，惟效果未如人 找不到如此環境。 足狀況，以致訟辯的操練機會亦付 意；另一部分的工作，則交由倫敦 闕如，這一惡性循環必須被打破。 的大律師代行，以致香港大律師無 正如孫國治法官在同一項判決中所 上述舉措一旦付諸實行，有關挑戰 從發揮其效能。無論如何，我們必 正確指出的，假如將狀書交由大律 便交由大律師肩負。我們須將狀書 須將均衡的狀態盡快恢復過來。 師草擬，他們須為簽有其名字的狀 書負責。這也是為何經驗豐富的事 務律師都知道，如果他們想修訂有 關狀書，須先行取得草擬該文件的 大律師同意。在今天，大律師和所 有其他專業人士都須為自身的疏忽 Practice Drafting Pleadings 負責，故上述這一點尤其重要。
大律師須預計其所申述的案情，將 會對法庭產生什麼影響。如果說： 許多案件在法官步入審判庭之前， 已視乎所提交狀書的理據強弱而分 出了勝負，這說法並不為過。現時 有越來越多上訴許可申請是「根據 書面」作出裁決，而無須經過口頭 聆訊。因此，現時對那些能為狀書 撰寫強而有力論據的人才之需求是 與日俱增。
敵對的一方，通常會依據另一方所 撰寫的狀書的質素優劣來衡量其強 弱。一支能力較差的法律團隊，其 所表現出來的，通常是愚昧無知與 長篇大論，並會將一些有力論點埋 藏在冗詞贅句中。
假如將撰寫狀書的工作交由大律師 負責，那麼幾乎在所有情況下，事 務律師都可受到庇護，而免於面對 犯有疏忽的指控。
www.hk-lawyer.org 41 • May 2019
The Hong Kong Legal Industry Should Participate in the Greater Bay Area Development with Open Vision and Wide Perspective
By Edward Liu
As a programmatic guide to the current Year plan announced in March 2016) development of the Greater Bay Area, and future cooperation and development clearly proposes to build Hong Kong the Outline Plan emphasises Hong of the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao into an international legal and dispute Kong’s highly internationalised and Greater Bay Area (the “Greater Bay Area”) resolution services center in the Asia- legalised business environment when to 2035, the Outline Development Plan Pacific region. Therefore, there is a need recognising the relatively leading for the Greater Bay Area (the “Outline for the legal industry in Hong Kong to international standard in the Greater Plan”) sets out the directions guiding carefully examine and understand the Bay Area. The principle of rule of law the development of the Greater Bay relevant contents of the Outline Plan, under “One Country, Two Systems” Area, as well as establishes the key in order to develop legal industry in the and the “Basic Law” has become an areas of cooperation. In the description Greater Bay Area while at the same time important cornerstone for Hong Kong’s of the cities in the Greater Bay Area, serving the needs of the country. overall business environment to be apart from continuing to support Hong widely recognised by the international Kong in consolidating and upgrading Assisting Mainland China to Promote community. According to the World its status as international financial, Business Environment of Legal Bank’s Doing Business 2019 Report, shipping and trade centers, the Outline Certainty Hong Kong was ranked fourth globally Plan again (as the National 13th Five- As a fundamental condition for the on the ease of doing business.
42 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • DISPUTE RESOLUTION 解決糾紛
Optimising business environment is will be provided for the construction of promote the establishment of a diversified an important idea of China’s “Reform the Greater Bay Area. Judicial exchanges dispute resolution mechanism. It is and Opening Up”. President Xi Jinping and collaboration embrace many mainly through the improvement of has repeatedly stressed in the past few aspects, including those between the international commercial dispute years that an essential part of further judiciaries, as well as in-depth exchanges resolution mechanism, the establishment expansion includes creating world-class between associations for lawyers and of an international arbitration center, business environment. At the National the organisations for dispute resolution. further the cooperation between “Two Sessions” (ie the annual meetings It is not difficult to foresee that with the the organisations for arbitration and of the National People’s Congress and the different legal systems in Guangdong, mediation in Guangdong, Hong Kong Chinese People’s Political Consultative Hong Kong and Macao, inter-regional and Macao, to provide arbitration and Conference) held in March this year, the judicial conflicts are inevitable due to the mediation services for economic and State Council’s “Annual Government cognitive barrier. Therefore, establishing trade activities in the three areas. Work Report” listed “optimising business a resources-sharing mechanism between environment to stimulate market vitality judiciaries is vital, allowing one to share In fact, the Greater Bay Area has unique and social creativity” as a major task with others the case-related foreign conditions for creating a branded, of the Central People’s Government laws and regulations, case acceptance, international and professional dispute this year. Therefore, while the country case precedents, and specific case resolution mechanism. Hong Kong is aims at providing world-class business analysis, thereby facilitating mutual one of the most popular arbitration environment, Hong Kong can apply the recognition and enforcement of laws and venues in the world, and the Hong relevant advanced concepts and tailor judgments to achieve judicial efficiency. Kong International Arbitration Centre the best practices to the Greater Bay As for lawyers, arbitrators and mediators, (“HKIAC”) is a highly acclaimed Area. they should go hand in hand to explore arbitration institution. establishing professional contacts and With a view to creating a legalised cross-border cooperation mechanisms In addition, many well-known domestic business environment in the Greater in the three places, so that they can lead and foreign arbitration institutions set Bay Area, the Outline Plan proposes the enterprises in the Greater Bay Area to up their offices in Hong Kong. Hong to strengthen the judicial exchanges go global and bring overseas enterprises Kong therefore naturally takes the lead and cooperation between Guangdong, into the Greater Bay Area. as a dispute resolution center in the Hong Kong and Macao, to boost the Asia-Pacific region. The Shenzhen Court establishment of a diversified dispute Establishing a Diversified Dispute of International Arbitration (“SCIA”) has resolution mechanism, so that quality, Resolution Mechanism already launched a bold and innovative efficient and convenient judicial services The Outline Plan elaborates on how to attempt by including Hong Kong
www.hk-lawyer.org 43 • May 2019
and Macao citizens to participate in intellectual property rights protection Shenzhen arbitration through different and maritime disputes. means (including appointing Hong Kong and Macao citizens to serve as In October last year, the Chief Executive their board of directors and allowing Ms Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor, them to participate in arbitration proposed in the Policy Address to as arbitrators or as agent ad litem). develop an online platform that could In particular, it has been creatively provide online arbitration, mediation stipulated in the arbitration rules of as well as smart contracts and related SCIA that Hong Kong can be selected services. Pursuant to this measure, the as the venue of arbitration. It has laid Budget announced on February 27 this a good foundation for promoting the year allocated HK$150 million to support establishment of a diversified dispute the development of a cross-region, resolution mechanism within the convenient, secured and cost-effective Greater Bay Area. online platform for dispute resolution. With the establishment of this platform, With the construction of the Greater Bay it is convenient for small and medium- Area, after the representative offices sized enterprises including Hong Kong, are set up by Hong Kong arbitration the Greater Bay Area and the Initiative organisations in the Greater Bay Area, economies, especially ASEAN countries, Guangdong, Hong Kong and Macao to facilitate commercial transactions, should gradually explore arbitration manage risks and resolve disputes, business in the Area. Moreover, attracting thereby consolidating and enhancing Hong Kong mediation agencies to set up Hong Kong’s status as the international branches in Shenzhen and Guangzhou, legal and dispute resolution services establishing the mutual recognition center. of qualifications for mediators in the two places, and formulating mediation Hong Kong Legal Services Help the rules are all proper ways to advance the Country in Global Governance establishment of a diversified dispute It can be seen from the many plans for resolution mechanism. Hong Kong in the Outline Plan that the country is full of expectations for the role Hong Kong as an International that Hong Kong can play. As President Xi Arbitration Venue Should Benefit from Jinping pointed out during his meeting and Provide Assistance to the “Belt with a delegation of top officials, political and Road Initiative” and business leaders from Hong Kong As an important supporting area for and Macao in November last year, together and provide legal support to the “Belt and Road Initiative” (the Hong Kong can support the country’s mainland China and overseas enterprises “Initiative”), the Outline Plan supports participation in global governance in for “going global” and “coming in” under Hong Kong to become a service center a variety of ways by a more proactive the “Belt and Road Initiatives”. to solve the infrastructure investment participation in national governance and commercial disputes arising from practices. The Outline Plan specifically In addition, as a highly respected the Initiative. In addition, the Outline mentions the need to strengthen jurisdiction, the Hong Kong legal Plan also proposes to promote the cooperation in Shenzhen-Hong Kong industry should make use of its handling of intellectual property legal affairs to create an international advantages in its understanding rights disputes through alternative legal service center and an international and familiarity with the application dispute resolution methods including commercial dispute resolution center. of common law-based international arbitration, mediation and consultation, business practices, to assist the as well as develop high value-added Apart from enhancing its own country in promoting a set of rules and services including maritime law and development, Hong Kong also shoulders regulations in line with with international shipping dispute resolution. These the responsibility of promoting the standards with more opened vision regulations highlight the particularity of establishment of a high quality and and wider perspective, allowing Hong Hong Kong as China’s only common law international diversified disputeKong law to make a presence in the jurisdiction, and Hong Kong’s capability resolution mechanism within mainland intellectual property rights protection, in providing competent dispute China, especially in the Greater Bay carriage of goods by sea, international resolution services in the areas of the Area, so that the legal professionals of commodities trading and large-scale Initiative for infrastructure investment, the Greater Bay Area can collaborate infrastructure construction.
44 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • DISPUTE RESOLUTION 解決糾紛
香港法律行業須以遠見及 廣闊視野參與大灣區發展
作者：劉洋
作為一個指導大灣區當前和遠期 2016年3月公佈的「十三五」規 助內地提升法治化營商環境 至2035年合作發展的綱領性文 劃之後再次明確提出要將香港建 作為大灣區發展的一項基礎條件， 件，《粵港澳大灣區發展規劃 設成為亞太區國際法律及爭議解 《綱要》在肯定大灣區整體具有比 綱要》(「《綱要》」)為大灣區 決服務中心的願景。因此，香港 較領先的國際化水準時，著重強調 建設定下了合作目標和原則，並 法律服務業界有必要仔細審視和 香港擁有高度國際化、法治化的營 確立了合作的重點領域。在對大 深入瞭解《綱要》相關內容，才 商環境。在「一國兩制」和《基本 灣區中心城市的描述中，除了一 能做到有的放矢，在促進香港法 法》保障下的良好法治，成為香港 如既往支持香港鞏固和提升國際 律服務業在大灣區蓬勃發展的同 整體營商環境受到國際社會廣泛認 金融、航運、貿易中心之外，繼 時，以香港所長服務國家所需。 同的重要基石。世界銀行在2019年
www.hk-lawyer.org 45 • May 2019
《全球營商環境報告》中， LEGAL SERVICES AND THE 航運服務業。這些規定突 將香港評為營商環境全球第 GREATER BAY DEVELOPMENT 出了香港作為中國唯一普 四佳的地方。 通法司法管轄區域的特殊 性，可以在涉及「一帶一 優化營商環境已經成為國家 路」建設項目、智慧財產 「改革開放」進入新時代的 權保護和海商海事領域， 一個重要標誌，國家主席習 提供強而有力的爭議糾紛 近平多次強調進一步擴大開 解決服務。 放的重要內容就包括營造國 際一流的營商環境。在剛剛 去年10月行政長官在《施 舉行的全國「兩會」上，國 政報告》中提出支援開發一 務院《政府工作報告》更是 個可以提供網上仲裁、調解 將「激發市場活力，著力優 以及智慧合約和相關服務的 化營商環境」列為今年政府 網上平台。為了配合這項措 的重要工作之一。因此，在 施，今年2月27日公佈的《 國家發展瞄準國際一流營商 財政預算案》決定撥款一億 環境標準之際，香港完全可 五千萬港元支持相關機構開 以將相關先進理念和最佳實 發一個跨地域、便捷、安全 踐對接大灣區。 和具有成本效益的爭議解決 網上平台。隨著這個平台的 為打造大灣區法治化營商環境，《 天獨厚的條件。香港是國際上最受 開通，可以便利包括香港、大灣區 綱要》提出要加強粵港澳司法交流 歡迎的仲裁地之一，而香港國際仲 以及「一帶一路」沿線經濟體特別 與協作，推動建立多元化糾紛解決 裁中心(HKIAC)更是廣受讚譽的仲 是東盟等地方的中小微企，促成交 機制，為大灣區建設提供優質、高 裁機構，加之眾多國內外知名仲裁 易，控制風險，解決爭議，從而鞏 效和便捷的司法服務和保障。司法 機構在香港設有辦事處，香港成為 固和提升香港國際爭議解決服務中 交流和協作其實包含多方面，既包 亞太區爭議解決服務中心自然占得 心的地位。 括司法機構之間的交流與協作，也 先機。另外，深圳國際仲裁院很早 包括律師組織以及仲裁調解機構的 就已經展開了港澳人士通過不同方 香港法律服務助國家參與全球治理 深入交流與合作。可以預見，在深 式參與深圳仲裁發展的大膽創新嘗 從《綱要》對香港的諸多謀劃可以 度融合的過程中，由於粵港澳三 試(包括委任港澳人士擔任其理事 看出，國家對香港可以發揮的作用 地擁有各自獨立且差別較大的法律 會發揮決策作用，允許港澳人士 充滿期待。正如國家主席習近平在 體系，不可避免的認知隔閡很可能 作爲代理人參與仲裁或擔任仲裁中 去年11月會見港澳訪問團時指出 SPONSORSHIP 導致區際司法衝突。因此，建立司 的調解員)，特別是在仲裁規則中 的，香港在更加積極主動參與國家 法機構之間的資源分享機制十分必 規定可以選擇香港作為仲裁地，都 治理實踐的過程中，可以以多種方 OPPORTUNITIES 要，實現包括民商事案件在內的涉 已經為在大灣區範圍內推動建立共 式支援國家參與全球治理。《綱 外法律法規、案件受理、裁判文書 商、共建、共用的多元化糾紛解決 要》特別提及要加強深港法律事務 NOW AVAILABLE! 交流、具體案例分析等資訊資源分 機制奠定了良好基礎。隨著大灣區 合作，聯動香港打造國際法律服務 享，從而減少三地在法律適用以及 建設的推進，在引入香港仲裁機構 中心和國際商事爭議解決中心。由 Contact Tracy at [email protected] 判決的互相承認和執行方面的司法 在大灣區建立代表處之後，粵港澳 此可見，除了提升自身發展外，香 障礙，達到提高司法效率的目的。 三地應逐步探索在大灣區先行先試 港還肩負著促進內地特別是大灣區 SAVE THE DATE! to join the mailing list to receive 至於律師以及仲裁員調解員之間， 港澳仲裁機構實際開展仲裁業務。 範圍內國際高水準多元化爭議解決 event updates and submission details. 則應該朝著三地建立專業聯繫及跨 另外，吸引香港調解機構落戶深圳 機制的建立，使大灣區的法律服務 INDIA - February 27 境合作機制的方向深入探討，從而 和廣州，建立兩地互認調解員資 機構可以「並船出海」，為內地企 MALAYSIA - March 28 Contact Amantha at [email protected] 可以聯合拓展國際法律服務市場， 質認定，制定調解規則，都是促進 業和境外企業沿著「一帶一路」建 為大灣區企業「走出去」以及境外 建立多元化爭議解決機制的應有之 設「走進來」和「走出去」提供法 SE ASIA - April 11 for more information on sponsorship and 企業到大灣區投資展業提供多元化 義。 律支援和服務。 CHINA - April 18 get publicity across the region. 法律服務。 JAPAN - June 13 港作國際仲裁地可借勢與助力「一 另外，作為備受尊崇的司法管轄區 SHARE YOUR ALB MOMENTS ON 建立多元化糾紛解決機制 帶一路」 域，香港法律服務業應該利用其瞭 HONG KONG - September 6 《綱要》對如何推動建立多元化糾 作為「一帶一路」建設的重要支撐 解和熟悉應用以普通法為基礎的國 SOCIAL MEDIA #ALBAWARDS 紛解決機制闡述較詳細。主要是通 區，《綱要》支持香港成為解決「 際商貿遊戲規則的優勢，以更開放 INDONESIA - October 10 過完善國際商事糾紛解決機制，建 一帶一路」建設專案投資和商業爭 的思維和更廣闊的視野，協助國家 MIDDLE EAST - Mid-October 設國際仲裁中心，支持粵港澳仲裁 議的服務中心。另外，《綱要》還 在推進「一帶一路」建設中建立一 和調解機構交流合作，為粵港澳經 提出要推動通過包括仲裁、調解和 套與國際標準接軌的制度規則，在 PHILIPPINES - October 25 濟貿易提供仲裁及調解服務。事實 協商等非訴訟爭議解決方式處理智 知識產權保護、海上貨物運輸、大 KOREA - November 14 上，大灣區打造品牌化、國際化和 慧財產權糾紛，以及支持香港發 宗商品貨物買賣和大型基礎設施建 專業化的糾紛解決機制本就具有得 展包括海事法律及爭議解決等高端 設等方面發出香港法律的聲音。 WWW.LEGALBUSINESSONLINE.COM/LAW-AWARDS 46 www.hk-lawyer.org SPONSORSHIP OPPORTUNITIES NOW AVAILABLE!
Contact Tracy at [email protected] SAVE THE DATE! to join the mailing list to receive event updates and submission details. INDIA - February 27 MALAYSIA - March 28 Contact Amantha at [email protected] SE ASIA - April 11 for more information on sponsorship and CHINA - April 18 get publicity across the region. JAPAN - June 13 SHARE YOUR ALB MOMENTS ON HONG KONG - September 6 SOCIAL MEDIA #ALBAWARDS INDONESIA - October 10 MIDDLE EAST - Mid-October PHILIPPINES - October 25 KOREA - November 14
WWW.LEGALBUSINESSONLINE.COM/LAW-AWARDS • • MayMay 2019 2019
INDUSTRY INSIGHTS 業界透視
ARBITRATION Overview of the Arrangement submitted for making an application for The official text of the Arrangement seeking interim relief from a Mainland Groundbreaking Arrangement can be found at http://gia.info.gov.hk/ Chinese court. Allowing Interim Measures in general/201904/02/P2019040200782 Mainland China for Hong Kong _307637_1_1554209666288.pdf. We set An application may be made both before Arbitrations out below some key features. or after the relevant arbitral institution accepts a notice of arbitration. If it is On 2 April 2019, the HKSAR Government Scope of Application after the institution’s acceptance of a and the Supreme People’s Court of Under the Arrangement, a party to notice of arbitration, a party should the People’s Republic of China signed “arbitral proceedings in Hong Kong” submit its application to the institution, the “Arrangement Concerning Mutual may apply for interim measures from which will then forward it to the relevant Assistance in Court-ordered Interim the relevant Mainland Chinese courts in Mainland Chinese court (see Art. 3 of the Measures in Aid of Arbitral Proceedings accordance with the relevant PRC laws Arrangement). by the Courts of the Mainland and of and regulations. the HKSAR” (the “Arrangement”). This Types of Interim Measures Available from is significant as it provides a means “Arbitral proceedings in Hong Kong” the Mainland Chinese Courts for parties to a Hong Kong-seated includes, in summary, arbitral The types of interim measures arbitration to seek interim measures proceedings which (i) are seated in available from the Mainland Chinese from the Mainland Chinese courts, Hong Kong; and (ii) administered courts include “property preservation, an option which was previously only by a prescribed list of institutions or evidence preservation and conduct available for arbitrations seated in permanent offices which are established preservation” measures (See Art. 1 of the Mainland China. This has implications or set up in Hong Kong (see Art. 2 of Arrangement). on the choice of dispute resolution the Arrangement). This list is yet to be forum in China-related transactions. published but is likely to include the Hong Although there is no express reference to Kong International Arbitration Centre injunctive relief, in line with existing PRC Existing Regime (HKIAC), the International Chamber law provisions, injunctive relief should, Under the existing regime, parties may of Commerce (ICC) - Hong Kong, and at least in theory, be encompassed. In sometimes find themselves in a difficult the China International Economic and particular, Art. 100 of the Civil Procedure position when there is a need for interim Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC) Law of the PRC provides that in certain measures in Mainland China. Given - Hong Kong. circumstances, a court may “order certain that Mainland Chinese courts had no conduct of the party or prohibit the party power to grant interim measures in It follows from the above that the from certain conduct”. It remains to be support of foreign-seated arbitrations, Arrangement does not extend to ad hoc seen how readily in practice a Mainland and interim measures obtained from arbitrations (eg an arbitration under the Chinese court would issue an injunction, an emergency arbitrator or the arbitral UNCITRAL rules that is not administered eg an anti-suit injunction, in support of a tribunal in the foreign-seated arbitration by any institution) or arbitrations Hong Kong arbitration. are not enforceable by the Mainland administered by arbitral institutions Chinese courts, parties may feel that which do not currently have an office in Commencement Date of the Arrangement they are left with no option but to adopt Hong Kong, even if those arbitrations The commencement date of the a clause providing for Mainland China- are seated in Hong Kong. Arrangement is to be announced seated arbitration administered by an following the promulgation of a judicial onshore arbitral institution. With the Timing and Procedures interpretation by the Supreme People’s Arrangement, this is no longer the only The Arrangement specifies the relevant Court of the PRC and the completion of option. procedures and documents to be the relevant procedures in Hong Kong.
48 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • INDUSTRY INSIGHTS 業界透視
It is understood that once the Arrangement comes into force, it will also be retrospectively applicable to arbitrations commenced before the commencement date of the HONG KONG-SEATED ARBITRATION Arrangement. SEEKING INTERIM MEASURES FROM Practical Tips THE MAINLAND CHINESE COURTS The Arrangement enhances the attractiveness of choosing Hong Kong as a seat of arbitration where there is a possibility that interim measures may be required in Mainland China.
In light of the Arrangement, if parties wish to preserve the ability to seek interim measures from Mainland Chinese courts, there are three points to bear in mind when considering the choice of dispute resolution clause: 關的交易，這影響到當事人選擇哪 進行且不是由任何機構管理的仲裁） 處仲裁地解決糾紛。 或由目前在香港未有辦事處的仲裁機 1. In terms of the seat of arbitration, a 構管理的仲裁，即使是以香港為仲裁 Mainland-China seated arbitration 現有制度 地，不在《安排》的涵蓋範圍之內。 clause is no longer the only option. 在現有制度下，當事人在中國內地 Parties can now also consider a 需要保全的時候，可能有時覺得 時間及程序 Hong Kong-seated arbitration 自己身陷窘境。由於國內法院無權 《安排》具體訂明相關程序，以及 clause. 批給保全以支持外國仲裁程序， 向內地法院申請保全時所要提交的 而國內法院又不可執行在外國仲裁 文件。 2. As to the choice between ad hoc 程序從緊急仲裁員或仲裁庭取得的 and administered arbitration, ad 保全，當事人可能覺得他們別無選 當事人可以在相關仲裁機構受理仲 hoc arbitration should be avoided. 擇，只好採用訂明由在岸仲裁機構 裁申請之前或之後申請保全。當事 管理國內仲裁程序的條款。簽署《 人如果是在機構受理仲裁申請之後 3. When considering an appropriate 安排》後，這不再是唯一的選擇。 才申請，應當將申請交予該機構， arbitral institution for administering 由該機構將申請轉遞國內相關法院 the Hong Kong-seated arbitration, 《安排》概覽 （《安排》第三條）。 parties should select from the 《安排》的官方文本可在https:// prescribed list of institutions, eg www.doj.gov.hk/pdf/2019/ 國內法院可提供的保全種類 HKIAC or the ICC. arbitration_interim_c.pdf找到。下文 國內法院可提供的保全，包括「財 為《安排》的幾項重點。 產保全、證據保全、行為保全」（ - Matthew Hodgson, Partner, Allen & Overy; 見《安排》第一條）。 Joanne Lau, Senior Associate, Allen & Overy 適用範圍 根據《安排》，「香港仲裁程序」 儘管沒有明確提到強制性濟助，但 的當事人可參照相關的中國法規， 按照中國現有法律條文，強制性濟 仲裁 向國內相關的法院申請保全。 助應當包括在內，至少理論上應當 如此。尤其是，《中華人民共和國 中國內地適用於香港仲裁的 總的來說，「香港仲裁程序」包 民事訴訟法》第一百條規定，在某 保全申請新安排 括：(i)以香港為仲裁地的仲裁程 些情況下，法院可以「責令其作出 序；及(ii)由名單上在香港設立的指 一定行為或者禁止其作出一定行 2019年4月2日，香港特別行政區政 定機構或常設辦事處管理的仲裁程 為」。現在還未見到國內法院在實 府與中華人民共和國最高人民法院 序（見《安排》第二條）。這個名 踐上可準備好發出禁制令，例如禁 簽署《關於內地與香港特別行政區 單現在尚未公布，但香港國際仲裁 制境外訴訟以支持在香港仲裁的命 法院就仲裁程序相互協助保全的安 中心、國際商會─ 香港區會，以及 令。 排》（《安排》）。這是一次重要 中國國際經濟貿易仲裁委員會─ 香 的安排，給香港仲裁程序的當事人 港，相當可能也在其中。 《安排》的生效日期 提供向國內法院申請保全的途徑。 在最高人民法院發布司法解釋和香 此前，只有內地仲裁程序的當事人 由此說來，臨時仲裁（例如，根據《 港完成相關程序後，將另訂《安 才可選擇申請。對於那些與中國有 聯合國國際貿易法委員會仲裁規則》 排》的日期生效。
www.hk-lawyer.org 49 • May 2019
據了解，《安排》一旦生效，將具 追溯力，適用於在《安排》生效日 期之前展開的仲裁。
實用小貼士 《安排》提高香港作為仲裁地的吸 引力，有可能需要在國內申請保全 的當事人，將更加可能選擇以香港 為仲裁地。
考慮到《安排》的內容，當事人如 果想保留向國內法院申請保存的能 力，選擇爭議解決條款的時候，有 三點要記住： • At the time of writing, judgment activity. Many consider that the is awaited in the first two cases in current leniency policy does not do 1. 關於仲裁地，以中國內地為仲裁 which allegations of breach of the enough to encourage companies to 地的條款不再是唯一的選擇。當 first conduct rule (anti-competitive self-report because (as things stand) 時人現在可以考慮以香港為仲裁 agreements) have been raised only a first “whistleblower” qualifies 地的條款。 by the Competition Commission for leniency and the prospect of civil against various corporate entities. liability to third parties remains. 2. 如果在臨時仲裁和被管理的仲裁 These two cases have given rise to Given its increased regulatory focus 之間作取捨，應當避免選擇臨時 a number of interlocutory decisions on the behaviour of individuals, it is 仲裁。 so far. Of particular interest will be no surprise to hear of reports that the Competition Tribunal’s ruling the Commission is formulating a 3. 當考慮合適的仲裁機構管理香港 on what is the appropriate standard leniency policy for individuals. 仲裁的時候，當事人應當揀選明 of proof (namely, a civil or criminal 單上指定的機構，例如香港國際 standard). • The Competition Commission is 仲裁中心或國際商會。 also thought to have a separate • A third case is proceeding before cooperation and settlement policy - 安理國際律師事務所合夥人 the Competition Tribunal and in the making. If true, this will Matthew Hodgson also concerns alleged breaches of be a welcome development for 安理國際律師事務所高級律師劉煦婷 the first conduct rule. In this case many. Negotiation, settlement, enforcement action has been taken proportionate reliefs for cooperation against two individuals, in addition and more transparency on to three companies. In common recommended fines have much with other regulatory trends, the going for them in the local COMPETITION/ANTITRUST Competition Commission has circumstances of Hong Kong. shifted its investigatory focus Things To Watch Out For towards individuals. - RPC, Hong Kong
The Hong Kong Competition Commission • One can also expect more regulatory appears to have been one of the major cooperation between regulators Editorial Note: On 29 April 2019, the Competition Commission published its beneficiaries of the government’s budget in Hong Kong; for example, the “Cooperation and Settlement Policy for for the fiscal year 2019-20. Reports Consumer Council, the Privacy Undertakings Engaged in Cartel Conduct”. suggest that for the current fiscal year the Commissioner and the Competition Commission will receive approximately Commission. This follows trends HK$156 million of taxpayers’ money – an in other jurisdictions. Also expect apparent 17 percent increase to its revised more cooperation between different 競爭事務 allocation for 2018-19. This is in addition competition regulators from to significant one-off funding support for different jurisdictions; particularly, 要注意的事情 the Commission’s litigation costs. in south-east Asia and across the boundary with the Mainland. 香港競爭事務委員會似乎是政府 For some a question arises as to what 2019至2020年財政年度預算案的主 the Hong Kong public and taxpayers • The Competition Commission is 要受益者之一。報告顯示，在本財 are getting for their money since the thought to be reviewing its current 政年度，「競委會」將收到納稅人 Competition Ordinance came into force leniency policy for corporate entities 約一億五千六百萬港元的金錢 - 與 in December 2015. alleged to be involved in cartel 2018至2019年度的修訂撥款相比，
50 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • INDUSTRY INSIGHTS 業界透視
明顯增加了17%。此外，還對「競 者寬免，以及提高建議罰款的透 fourth respondent is a partnership 委會」的訴訟費用提供了一次性重 明度，均有很大的探討餘地。 named Tai Dou Building Contractor (“Tai 大的資金支助。 Dou”). - RPC 香港 有些人提出疑問，自2015年12月 Relevant Course of Proceedings 《競爭條例》生效以來，香港市 編者按：2019年4月29日競爭事務委 The action was brought in the 民和納稅人花了金錢後究竟得到什 員會已出版「為從事合謀行為之業務 Competition Tribunal by the 麽。 實體而設的合作及和解政策」。 Commission’s Originating Notice of Application on 14 August 2017. The • 在撰寫本文時，大家正在等待 solicitors for Tai Dou filed a Notice to 競爭事務委員會對各公司指控 Act and Response on 28 September 違反第一行為守則﹙反競爭協 2017. The trial was targeted to take 議﹚各案件中的頭兩個案件的 place from 12 November to 14 December 判決。到現時為止，這兩個案 COMPETITION/ANTITRUST 2018. Subsequently, Tai Dou filed a 件已導致了若干非正審判決。 witness statement made by Mr KC Ho, 特別令人感興趣的是競爭事務 Competition Tribunal Refuses its General Manager, on 19 April 2018 審裁處關於何謂適當的舉證標 Last-Minute Application to (“1st witness statement”). Between June 準﹙即民事還是刑事標準﹚的 Amend Pleadings Two Months and September 2018, Tai Dou changed 裁決。 Before Trial its legal representatives two times.
• 第三個正在由競爭事務審裁處審 Introduction Tai Dou made the present application 理的案件，據稱也涉及違反第一 In Competition Commission v Wing on 24 September 2018, on the basis that 行為守則。在本案中，除三家公 Hing Construction Co Ltd [2018] HKCT Tai Dou did not authorise Mr KC Ho to 司外，還對兩名個人採取了執法 6, the Competition Tribunal refused undertake any work in relation to On Tat 行動。與其他有關監管的趨勢一 a respondent’s application to amend Estate, and Mr KC Ho had bore all the 樣，競爭事務委員會已將調查重 its Response and file new witness costs and retained all the revenues and 點轉向個人。 statements in substitution for a profits arising from any decoration work statement already filed. performed. In essence, Tai Dou sought to • 大家也可以預見，香港的監管機 completely overturn what was pleaded 構，例如消費者委員會、私隱專 Factual Background in the 1st witness statement and argued 員和競爭事務委員會，在規管方 In these proceedings, the respondents that its partners were kept completely in 面會有更多合作。這點與其他司 were contractors appointed from a the dark of Tai Dou’s involvement in the 法管轄區的趨勢相同。此外，我 reference list of the Hong Kong Housing proceedings. 們亦預計不同司法管轄區的不同 Authority to perform decoration work 競爭事務規管機構會加強合作， for tenants of public housing units in When the present application was 特別是在東南亞及與內地的跨境 three buildings in On Tat Estate in Kwun filed, the Commission and all other 合作。 Tong. The applicant, the Competition respondents were ready to proceed with Commission (the “Commission”), the trial which would commence on 26 • 據悉，競爭事務委員會正在檢 alleged, among other things, that November 2018. 討其對該等被指參與卡特爾活 between June and November 2016, the 動的公司的現行寬容政策。許 respondents made or gave effect to an Decision 多人認為，目前的寬容政策不 agreement or engaged in a concerted The Tribunal considered Tai Dou’s 足以鼓勵公司自我舉報，因為 practice among themselves to allocate application to be made at a very late ﹙按目前情況﹚只有第一個「 various floors of each of the three stage when other parties were under a 舉報人」才有資格獲得寬容處 buildings among themselves to carry tight schedule in preparation for the trial 理，以及對第三方承擔民事責 out decoration work. which had been scheduled over one year. 任的機會依然存在。鑒於其加 Apart from delay in making application, 強了對個人行為的監管，傳出 The Commission argued that the above the Court also took into account the 「競委會」正在為個人制定寬 arrangements (1) contravened the procedural history of the case and the 容處理的政策的報道也就不足 first conduct rule in the Competition forthcoming trial dates. In addition, 為奇了。 Ordinance (Cap. 619) (the “Ordinance”), Tai Dou failed to produce compelling and (2) amounted to serious anti- evidence in support of its present • 競爭事務委員會據悉也正在制定 competitive conduct in the form of application. The partners only began 一項獨立的合作與和解政策。如 market sharing and price-fixing. The to take an interest in the proceedings 果這是真的，事態的發展將受許 Commission seeks a declaration in around early September 2018 when 多人歡迎。就香港的情況而言， accordingly and an order for pecuniary they learnt that the maximum pecuniary 談判、和解、合乎比例給予合作 penalty against the respondents. The penalty that could be imposed was
www.hk-lawyer.org 51 • May 2019
referable to the turnover of the of the proceedings and avoid delayed 首份證人陳述書的全部申述，並指 undertaking and not just the turnover of applications to the Tribunal. Tai Dou捲進有關法律程序，其合夥 the estate project in question. 人是完全被蒙在鼓裡。 - Dominic Wai, Partner, ONC Lawyers The Tribunal accepted the Commission’s www.onc.hk Tai Dou將現行申請存檔時，競委會 argument that even though other 及所有其他答辯人已為於2018年11 respondents had also raised the 月26日展開的審訊作準備。 “sub-contractor” argument, the 競爭/反壟斷 Commission would require significant 裁決 amount of time to analyse Tai Dou’s 競爭事務審裁處不接納在審 審裁處認為Tai Dou太遲提出申請， new arguments such that the trial dates 訊前兩個月提出最後一刻的 而那時其他各當事方已在如火如荼 would have to be vacated. There was no 狀書修訂申請 地，為早於一年多前已排期的審訊 justification to force the Commission to 作準備。除了太遲提出申請外，法 squeeze its investigation, preparation 簡介 庭亦將案件的程序紀錄及臨近的審 and decision-making processes all into 在Competition Commission v Wing 訊日期納入考慮範圍內。此外，Tai the coming few weeks. Hing Construction Co Ltd [2018] Dou並未能提供具說服力證據支持 HKCT 6一案中，競爭事務審裁處拒 其現行申請。各合夥人是在2018年 The Tribunal concluded that an 絕讓答辯人修訂其答辯書及提交新 9月初得悉最高罰款額是依據該業務 adjournment of the trial itself would 證人陳述書，以取代先前提交的陳 實體的營業額，而並非只是相關屋 cause serious prejudice to the parties 述書。 苑項目的營業額來計算後，才開始 involved in litigation. While the present 認真關注該法律程序。 proceedings is an enforcement action 案情背景 under the Ordinance that can be 本案各答辯人是香港房屋委員會承建 審裁處接納競委會的論點，即儘管 differentiated from an ordinary civil 商遴選名單中的承建商，獲委為觀塘 其他答辯人亦提出了「分判商」這 litigation, s. 144 of the Ordinance 安達邨三幢大廈的公屋單位租戶進行 論點，但由於競委會需要相當時間 enables the Tribunal to follow “the 裝修工程。本案申請人—競爭事務委 來分析Tai Dou的新論點，故審訊日 practice and procedure of the Court of 員會（「競委會」）指稱，各答辯人 期理應取消。競委會不應被強制將 First Instance in the exercise of its civil 在2016年6月至11月間，相互訂立 其調查、準備及決策程序全部擠壓 jurisdiction”. The Competition Tribunal 或執行協議，或從事經協調的做法， 在未來數星期完成。 Rules (Cap. 619D) also provides that 分配三幢大廈不同樓層的裝修工程。 cases should be dealt with in an efficient 審裁處確認將審訊押後，將會給案 and expedient manner. Thus, Tai Dou’s 競委會指上述安排(1)違反《競爭條 中其他當事方造成嚴重損害。儘 application was refused. 例》（第619章）的第一行為守則，及 管現行的法律程序是一項根據《條 (2)構成瓜分市場和合謀定價等嚴重反 例》進行的執法訴訟（從而有別於 Implications 競爭行為，要求審裁處作出宣告並命令 一般民事訴訟），但《條例》第144 The judge stated in obiter that there is a 各答辯人支付罰款。第四答辯人是一家 條賦權審裁處，可依循「原訟法庭 public interest to maintain the integrity of 名為Tai Dou Building Contractor（“Tai 在行使其民事司法管轄權時所採用 the litigation process in the Competition Dou”）的合夥企業。 的常規及程序」。《競爭事務審裁 Tribunal. Further, there is a broader 處規則》（第619D章）亦規定，案 public interest in these enforcement 相關法律程序 件應以快捷、合宜的方式處理，故 actions to see the proceedings being 本案於2017年8月14日以競委會的 拒絕接納Tai Dou的申請。 dealt with as expeditiously as is 原訴申請通知書向競爭事務審裁處提 reasonably practicable. The outcome 起。Tai Dou的代表律師於2017年9月 影響 of these proceedings may well serve 28日向法院存檔擬行事通知書及答辯 法官在判詞的附帶意見指出，維持競 as guidance to other undertakings 書。審訊訂於2018年11月12日至12 爭事務審裁處訴訟程序的健全穩定符 and persons in the regulation of their 月14日進行。其後，Tai Dou於2018 合公眾利益。此外，在合理可行的情 economic conduct. 年4月19日存檔了一份由其總經理Mr 況下，以盡可能合宜的方式處理相關 KC Ho作出的證人陳述書（「首份證 法律程序，亦符合該等執法訴訟中的 The reasoning demonstrates that values 人陳述書」）。2018年6月至9月期 更廣泛公眾利益。該等法律程序的結 upheld within enforcement actions 間，Tai Dou合共兩次更換法律代表。 果，將可作為其他業務實體或人士規 correspond with those promoted in civil 範其經濟行為的指引。 litigations. Efficiency in resolving legal Tai Dou於2018年9月24日提出本 proceedings without delay is no doubt an 申請，理由是Tai Dou並沒有授權Mr 上述論證顯示，執法訴訟所秉持的 important consideration of the Tribunal KC Ho進行任何與安達邨有關的工 價值，與民事訴訟所倡導的一致。 in ruling last-minute applications in 程，而所有的裝修工程費用是由Mr 高效審理訟案，毫不遲延，無疑是 enforcement actions. Parties should KC Ho負責，收益和利潤亦由Mr KC 審裁處對於執法訴訟的當事方於最 therefore take note of milestone dates Ho收取。簡言之，Tai Dou要求推翻 後一刻提出申請，該如何作出裁定
52 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • INDUSTRY INSIGHTS 業界透視
的一項重要考慮因素。當事方因此 means. Eastweek applied for a judicial engages in collecting personal data, the 應留意相關法律程序的進度指標日 review of the Privacy Commissioner’s provisions of the PDPO squarely apply. 期，避免向審裁處提出遲延申請。 decision, the application for which was dismissed by the Court of First Instance. The Court further emphasised that - 衞紹宗律師，柯伍陳律師事務所合夥人 Eastweek further appealed to the Court while the complainant would be www.onc.hk of Appeal against the dismissal of the entirely justified in regarding the article judicial review application and the and the photograph as an unfair and appeal was allowed. impertinent intrusion into her sphere of personal privacy, the aim of the PDPO Collecting Personal Data and was to protect the privacy of individuals DATA PRIVACY Relevance of Identity in relation to personal data, namely, In all cases where DPP1 is contravened, information privacy as opposed to other Facial Recognition and CCTV the contravening act must involve the kinds of privacy interests including Surveillance act of “collecting” personal data, this territorial privacy, personal privacy or being the subject matter of DPP1 of the communications and surveillance privacy. The Court of Appeal’s decision in PDPO. Based on the facts of the case, Eastweek Publisher Ltd & Anor v Privacy the Court of Appeal held that the DPPs Implications in the Digital Era Commissioner for Personal Data [2000] 1 had not been engaged at all. What would happen if a similar complaint HKC 692 is always known to be one of the were to come before me today? The landmark decisions on the interpretation The Court held that in the act of availability of social media and powerful of Data Protection Principle (“DPP”) 1 in personal data collection, the data user search engines has made it technically Schedule 1 of the Personal Data (Privacy) must be compiling information about easier and feasible for people to ascertain Ordinance (Cap. 486) (“PDPO”). We will an identified person or about a person the identity of an otherwise unknown examine in this article the decision and whom the data user intends to or seeks person whose image is captured in a the impact of time and technology on it. to identify. What was crucial in the photograph. It has been reported that case was the complainant’s anonymity facial recognition technology deployed Background and the irrelevance of her identity to in surveillance cameras has assisted The complainant was photographed on the photographer, the reporter and policemen in arresting criminals. If a a street by a photographer working for Eastweek. The Court held that taking person’s image is captured by artificial Eastweek magazine (“Eastweek”). The photograph of the complainant in intelligence installed in the CCTV system complainant’s photograph, together with the circumstances of the case did with intent to ascertain his identity, this some other women being photographed, not constitute an act of collection of may constitute collection of personal was published in an article in Eastweek personal data of the complainant. data, presumably by the operator of the with unflattering and negative comments CCTV system in the first place. about her fashion style. The photograph The decision was not suggesting that was taken and published without the taking someone’s photograph can never When footage in a CCTV system is complainant’s knowledge or consent. be an act of personal data collection. It being used to ascertain the identities of plainly can, and it all depends on the individuals by automated means, it would The Privacy Commissioner initially found circumstances of the case. The Court amount to collection of personal data of that there was a breach of DPP1(2)(b) stressed that the press or other media individuals, necessitating the application on the part of Eastweek in collecting the organisations do not fall outside the of the PDPO including the notification complainant’s personal data by an unfair scope of the PDPO. If an organisation requirement under DPP1(3) - in Schedule 1 to the PDPO and the limitation of use requirement under DPP3 etc. DPP1(3) states that a data user shall take all practicable steps to inform data subjects of the purpose of the collection of the personal data. DPP3(1) requires a data user to obtain prescribed consent of data subjects if their personal data is used for a new purpose. Depending on the circumstances of the case, a data user may consider if any of the exemptions under Part 8 of the PDPO (eg for the prevention and detection of crime under s. 58(1)(a)) are applicable. I would advise operators of such systems to conduct a
www.hk-lawyer.org 53 • May 2019
privacy impact assessment to assess if 上訴庭認為，要構成收集個人資料 訂明的豁免條文（例如第58(1)(a)條 there is indeed genuine need to install 此行為，資料使用者必須是在蒐集 為罪行的防止或偵測）是否適用。 such systems and, even if so, whether 一名已被資料使用者確定身份的人 我建議使用閉路電視系統系統的人 there are any less privacy-intrusive 士，或一名資料使用者意欲或設法 士進行私隱影響評估，去評定是否 alternatives to installing such systems. 確定其身份人士之資料。本案的關 有切實需要安裝閉路電視系統，以 For details, please refer to “Guidance on 鍵在於投訴人身份並未被披露，以 及是否有其他私隱侵犯程度較低的 CCTV Surveillance and the Use of Drones” 及投訴人身份對攝影師、記者及《 替代方法。詳情可參閱私隱專員公 issued by the Privacy Commissioner for 東周刊》並無重要性。因此在本案 署於2017年3月發出的《閉路電視 Personal Data, Hong Kong in March 2017. 情況下，拍攝投訴人的照片並不構 監察及使用航拍機指引》。附有人 Operators of systems with AI functions 成收集她的個人資料。 工智能的閉路電視系統，有可能收 that may capture personal data should 集個人資料，使用者應小心考慮這 carefully consider the privacy implications 「東周刊案」的裁決並不是指所有 些系統對私隱的影響，以及遵守《 of such systems and their compliance 拍攝某人的照片都不構成收集個人 私隱條例》規定的責任。 obligations under PDPO. 資料，而是指出是否涉及收集個人 資料，須視乎個案情況而定。上訴 - 香港個人資料私隱專員黃繼兒大律師 - Stephen Kai-yi Wong, Barrister, 庭重申，新聞工作者或其他傳媒機 Privacy Commissioner for Personal Data, 構亦須遵守《私隱條例》。如機構 Hong Kong 從事收集個人資料，《私隱條例》 的規定便適用。 INSOLVENCY/RESTRUCTURING 個人資料私隱 上訴庭亦強調，投訴人完全有理由 認為該篇文章和照片不公平和不禮 What Happens When a 容貌辨識與閉路電視監控 貌地侵犯了她的個人私隱領域，但 Creditor Petitions to Wind Up 《私隱條例》旨在保障個人在個人 a Company Already Subject to 上訴庭就Eastweek Publisher Ltd & 資料方面的私隱權 （即資訊方面的 an Unfair Prejudice Petition? Anor v Privacy Commissioner for 私隱權），而不是保障其他範疇的 Personal Data [2000] 1 HKC 692的 私隱權益，包括地域私隱、人身私 Introduction 判決經常被視為解釋《個人資料（ 隱或通訊及監察私隱。 The question arose in the recent case 私隱）條例》（香港法例第486章） of Li Fu Hua (also known as Denise Li) （《私隱條例》）附表1保障資料第 v Chen Ching Chih and another HCMP 1原則的重要案例。我們將於此文檢 數碼世代下的啟示 1374/2018, [2018] HKCFI 2786. 視該判決以及時間和科技對其帶來 如果今天有類似的投訴又將會怎 的影響。 樣？藉著社交媒體和功效強大的搜 Chronology 索器，令人們在技術上更容易和更 1. On 31 August 2018, Li Fu Hua (the 背景 切實可行地透過照片中的影像， “Petitioner”) presented an unfair 《東周刊》攝影記者於街頭拍下投 辨識其他不知名人士的身份。據報 prejudice petition (the “Petition”) 訴人的照片。《東周刊》其後刊登 導，監察攝錄機中的面容識別技術 against Chen Ching Chih (the 包括投訴人在內的女性照片，並對 已成功協助警察逮捕犯罪分子。假 “1st Respondent”). Prosperous 她們的衣著打扮評頭品足，言辭貶 如閉路電視系統中的人工智能技術 Global China Holding Limited (the 損。投訴人對於拍照和刊登照片並 攝錄了一個人的影像並意圖辨識其 “Company”) was joined as a nominal 不知情，亦沒有給予同意。 身份，這可能會構成閉路電視系統 party. The Petitioner argued that 運作者收集個人資料。 she was wrongly excluded from the 私隱專員認為《東周刊》透過不公平 management of the Company by 方式收集投訴人的個人資料，違反保 當閉路電視系統中的錄像會自動被 the 1st Respondent. The Petitioner 障資料第1(2)(b)原則。《東周刊》 用作辨識個人身份，這就等於收集 relied on such unfairly prejudicial 就私隱專員的決定提出司法覆核申 個人資料，需要遵守《私隱條例》 conducts to seek equitable relief 請，但遭原訟庭駁回。《東周刊》再 規定，包括附表一保障資料原則第 from the court. 就原訟庭駁回其司法覆核申請提出上 1(3)原則中有關須告知資料當事人 訴，獲上訴庭接納上訴得直。 的規定，以及第3原則有關使用的限 2. On 6 September 2018, Yi Chun 制等。保障資料第1(3) 原則訂明資 Navigation Inc. (the “Creditor”) who 收集個人資料及辨識身份的重要性 料使用者應採取所有切實可行的步 was controlled by the 1st Respondent 所有違反保障資料第1原則的個案， 驟，通知資料當事人收集其個人資 served a statutory demand for 都必須涉及「收集」個人資料，這 料的目的。保障資料第3(1) 原則規 repayment of debt on the Company. 是《私隱條例》中保障資料第1原則 定資料使用者須獲得資料當事人的 不可或缺的一環。基於本個案的事 訂明同意，才可將其個人資料用於 3. On 24 September 2018, the 實，上訴庭認為保障資料原則並不 新目的。視乎個案的具體情況，資 Petitioner issued an amendment 適用於本個案。 料使用者可考慮《私隱條例》第8部 summons to amend the Petition
54 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • INDUSTRY INSIGHTS 業界透視
and presented a contributory’s winding up petition against the 1st Respondent and the Company (the “Contributory Winding Up Petition”).
4. On 28 September 2018, the Creditor presented a creditor’s winding up petition against the Company (the “Creditor’s Winding Up Petition”).
5. On 3 October 2018, the Petition was listed for hearing. In view of the pending Creditor’s Winding Up Petition which the court was told would be uncontested, the court ordered a temporary stay of the Petition including the amendment summons. other party. The fact that the applicant Is That a Fair Result? 6. On 10 December 2018, winding would or might well have succeeded It is questionable whether the costs order up order was made against the at trial is not a sufficient ground for made is a fair one. The Petitioner may Company on the Creditor’s Winding displacing the presumption but if it is have genuine grievance against the 1st Up Petition. plain that the claim would have failed, Respondent. Whilst the Petitioner did not that is an additional factor favouring dispute that the Company was insolvent 7. On 17 December 2018, the judge the presumption. The motivation of and should be wound up, it does not decided that the Petition should withdrawal due to practical, pragmatic necessarily mean that the Petitioner be struck out or dismissed and the or financial reasons as opposed to a lack could not proceed with the Petition and Petitioner then applied to withdraw of confidence in the merits of the case is obtain reliefs such as a buy-out order the Petition. not sufficient too. based on a valuation at a date when the Company was still solvent. Apparently Rationale of the judge’s decision The judge decided that the winding the judge’s decision is very much based Striking Out the Petition up order made is not a change of on the fact that the Petitioner chose to The judge decided that there was no circumstances caused by some form withdraw the Petition. But he was also reason for the Petition to hang over the of unreasonable conduct on the 1st of the view that the Petition should be 1st Respondent when in reality there Respondent. There is nothing to suggest withdrawn as he mentioned that any was no prospect that the Petition would that the presentation of the Creditor’s wrong-doing of the 1st Respondent, if any, be heard. The relief as prayed by the Winding Up Petition is improper. The should be investigated by the liquidators. Petitioner could never be granted in Petitioner would or might well have With respect, this was not a very practical view of the winding up of the Company. succeeded at trial is not itself a sufficient suggestion. Liquidators could be very Moreover, with the winding up of the reason to depart from the general rule. expensive and the Company seems Company, the liquidators should be The Petition was presented well before to have little assets to finance such the one to investigate any wrongdoings the statutory demand served by the investigation. More importantly, if the against the Company. Therefore, there Creditor is an irrelevant consideration Petitioner’s complaint is unjustifiable is no utility in maintaining the Petition because the Petitioner had then applied exclusion from management, this is not and the Petition should be struck out or for withdrawal. Lastly, the Petitioner something that a liquidator should be dismissed. confirming that the Company being concerned as it was not a wrong done insolvent in her Contributory Winding Up to the Company. Hence, it is submitted Petitioner to Pay costs Petition has rendered such petition an that whether the general presumption Generally, the party who applies to inappropriate one. The 1st Respondent is that those withdrawing the petition withdraw an action or any proceedings entitled to argue that the Petitioner has should pay the respondent costs would bear the costs unless the applicant no interest to present and continue the should be displaced in situation like the shows a good reason for departing from Petition. present case is a question that remains that position by, eg, showing a change of debatable. circumstances to which the applicant did Therefore, the judge ordered the not contribute and is brought by some Petitioner to pay the 1st Respondent’s - Ludwig Ng, Senior Partner, ONC Lawyers form of unreasonable conduct on the costs. www.onc.hk
www.hk-lawyer.org 55 • May 2019
無力償債/重組 可能，便不應讓其繼續困擾第一答 進行調查的應是清盤人。然而，上 辯人。由於該公司將進行清盤，呈 述主張恐怕難以實行，因清盤人的 債權人向面對不公平損害呈 請人所尋求的濟助將永不能實現。 費用不菲，而該公司看來並無足夠 請的公司提出清盤呈請—會 此外，隨著該公司被清盤，調查曾 資產負擔相關調查費用；更重要的 有何情況？ 否有人對該公司作出任何不當行為 一點是，呈請人所提出的申訴，若 的工作，應由清盤人負責。因此， 是指他被無理排除於公司的管理層 前言 繼續維持該呈請並無實際作用，故 以外，這實非清盤人應予關注的事 問題發生於近期的一宗案件Li Fu 應將其剔除或駁回。 項，因該等不當做法並非施加於該 Hua (also known as Denise Li) v 公司身上。因此，撤回呈請的一方 Chen Ching Chih and another HCMP 呈請人承擔訟費 應負責支付答辯人訟費（猶如本案 1374/2018, [2018] HKCFI 2786。 一般而言，申請撤回訴訟或任何法律 的情況般）這項一般性推定應否被 程序的一方須承擔相關訟費，除非申 推翻，看來仍有商榷餘地。 時序 請人能提出不須遵從該規定的有效理 1. 2018年8月31日，Li Fu Hua（ 由（例如，證明情況出現了變化，而 - 伍兆榮律師，柯伍陳律師事務所高級合夥人 「呈請人」）向Chen Ching 其起因與申請人無關，而是因另一方 www.onc.hk Chih（「第一答辯人」）提出一 的某些不合理行為導致）。申請人本 項不公平損害呈請（「該呈請」 應或本有可能在審訊中勝訴的這一事 ），而Prosperous Global China 實，並非推翻該項推定的充分理由； Holding Limited（「該公司」） 但假如該申索很明顯應會敗訴，此乃 被加入作為名義上的當事方。呈 有利該推定的一項附加因素。此外， INSURANCE LAW 請人稱第一答辯人不當地將她排 受實際、實效、財政理由（而非因對 除於該公司管理層之外，並就該 案件的理據缺乏信心）的促使而撤回 Consultation on Imposing 等不公平損害行為尋求法院的衡 呈請，亦不足以推翻該推定。 Pecuniary Penalties against 平法濟助。 Insurance Intermediaries 法官裁定，清盤令並非因第一答辯 2. 2018年9月6日，由第一答辯人 人遭受某些不合理行為而導致出現 The new Hong Kong insurance 控制的Yi Chun Navigation Inc.（ 的情況變更。案中並無證據顯示， intermediary regime is expected to 「債權人」）向該公司送達一份 該債權人清盤呈請的提出，乃屬不 commence in mid-2019. In preparation, 法定要求償債書。 恰當。即使呈請人本應或本有可能 the Insurance Authority (“IA”) of Hong 在審訊中勝訴，這並非不履行該一 Kong has sought consultation on the 3. 2018年9月24日，呈請人發出 般規定的充分理由。由於呈請人其 Draft Guideline on Exercising Power to 一份修訂傳票以修訂該呈請，並 後已申請撤回該呈請，所以即使該 Impose Pecuniary Penalty in Respect of 針對第一答辯人及該公司提出分 呈請是在債權人送達法定要求償債 Regulated Persons under the Insurance 擔人清盤呈請（「分擔人清盤呈 書之前提出，它仍非一項相關考慮 Ordinance Cap. 41 (“Draft Guideline”). 請」）。 因素。最後一點，呈請人確認該公 司在其分擔人清盤呈請中是處於無 Under the new s. 81 of the Insurance 4. 2018年9月28日，債權人向該公 力償債情況，這使得該呈請的提出 Ordinance, the IA has power to take a 司提出債權人清盤呈請（「債權 成為不恰當。第一答辯人有權辯稱 number of disciplinary actions against 人清盤呈請」）。 呈請人在該呈請的提出及繼續進行 a regulated person for misconduct or if 方面，並不享有任何權益。 the regulated person is not fit or proper. 5. 該呈請於2018年10月3日排期聆 Pecuniary penalties are not to exceed 訊。有鑒於債權人清盤呈請仍未 因此，法官頒令呈請人須支付第一 HK$10 million or three times the amount 了結，而法庭獲告知當中將不會 答辯人的訟費。 of profit gained or loss avoided. 有任何爭議，法庭命令暫時擱置 該呈請（包括該修訂傳票）。 裁決是否恰當？ Under the new intermediary regulatory 所頒發的訟費令適當與否，是值得 regime, a “regulated person” means 6. 2018年12月10日，法庭就債權 商榷的。第一答辯人也許確實令呈 a licensed insurance intermediary and 人清盤呈請向該公司頒發清盤 請人受屈。儘管呈請人未就該公司 includes the responsible officer and 令。 無力償債及應予清盤一事提出爭 a person involved in the insurance 議，但這並非必然意味呈請人不能 intermediary’s management. Under the 7. 2018年12月17日，法官裁定應 繼續進行該呈請及獲得濟助 （例如 new intermediary regulatory regime, 將該呈請剔除或駁回，呈請人乃 法庭以該公司仍具償債能力的某一 any person undertaking “regulated 申請撤回該呈請。 天所進行的估值作為依據頒發收購 activities” will require an insurance 令）。法官的裁決，似乎主要基於 intermediary licence unless exempt. 法官的裁決理據 呈請人選擇撤回該呈請，但亦認為 “Regulated activities” is a broad 剔除該呈請 該呈請應予撤回，因他曾提到負責 concept which includes arranging and 法官裁定既然該呈請並無真正聆訊 對第一答辯人的不當行為（如有） negotiating a contract of insurance,
56 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • INDUSTRY INSIGHTS 業界透視
insurance agents and brokers. For instance, regulated persons also include employees of insurance companies engaged in regulated activities. Given the broad scope of regulated activities and different types of regulated persons, insurance industry players need to carefully consider how the Draft Guideline may apply to regulated persons involved in their business and take the opportunity during the consultation process to clarify anything required.
Finally, it is important that the regulated person is given an opportunity to be heard. The IA is required to give the regulated INSURANCE INTERMEDIARIES person a reasonable opportunity to be heard. However, currently, there is a lack of details regarding the proposed inviting or inducing a person to enter into • A firm: whether there was a systemic procedure and whether this is different a contract of insurance, giving regulated weakness in the firm’s internal to the current disciplinary procedure advice and inducing or inviting a person controls and risk management with SROs (for instance, is there a right to make a material decision. systems. for the intermediary to directly question the complainant during the disciplinary In the consultation paper, the IA • An individual: the person’s hearing?). indicated that it proposes to take experience in the industry and a balanced approach in imposing whether there was an abuse of a - Tow Lu (TL) Lim, partner; Mayer Brown; pecuniary penalties and in ensuring position of trust. Jenny Yu, counsel, Mayer Brown that they are “effective, proportionate and fair”. The Draft Guideline sets out Given the diverse range of regulated a number of factors the IA proposes to activities and different types of regulated 保險 take into account in imposing pecuniary persons, the IA has decided not to take penalties and the amount of such a tariff-based approach in imposing 對保險中介人施加罰款的諮詢 penalties, including: pecuniary penalties as this may not achieve effective, proportionate or fair 香港的新保險中介人機制預期將於 • Nature, seriousness and impact outcomes. 2019年中實施。在籌劃過程中，香 of conduct: whether conduct was 港保險業監管局（「保監局」）就「 intentional, reckless or negligent, Comment 《保險業條例》(第41章)有關向受規 duration and frequency of the The consultation was closed late last 管人士行使施加罰款權力的指引草擬 conduct, loss and risk of loss, impact year and still waiting for consultation 本」（「指引草擬本」）進行諮詢。 on the industry, whether conduct conclusions. The Draft Guideline involved breach of fiduciary duty or provides a broad framework for the IA to 根據新制定的《保險條例》第81 trust or financial crime. impose pecuniary penalties in light of its 條，對於受規管人士的不當行為或 objective to ensure pecuniary penalties 未能符合適當 性等情況，保監局有 • Subsequent behaviour: manner of are effective, fair and proportionate. 權對其作出紀律處分。罰款金額為 reporting, cooperation, remedial 不超過1,000萬港元或獲取的利潤或 steps taken. The IA has broader powers than the self- 避免的損失的數額三倍。 regulated bodies currently regulating • Previous disciplinary record and insurance intermediaries (“SROs”). 根據新中介人規管機制，「受規管 compliance history. Insurance intermediaries and insurers 人士」指持牌保險中介人，包括負 should carefully study the factors set 責人及參與保險中介人的管理的人 • Other factors: financial resources out in the Draft Guideline and consider 士。根據新中介人規管機制， 進 of the person, result of any civil or whether they are appropriate and 行「受規管活動」的人士除非獲得 criminal actions. suitable. 豁免，否則皆須領取保險中介人牌 照。「受規管活動」是一個範圍很 The IA will also take into account in Further, regulated activities cover a broad 廣的概念，包括安排及洽談保險合 relation to: scope of activities beyond traditional 約、邀請或誘使任何人訂立保險合
www.hk-lawyer.org 57 • May 2019
約、提供受規管意見，及誘使或邀 外，例如受規管人士亦包括從事受規 but, as ever, there is a context to be 請任何人士作出關鍵決定。 管活動的保險公司僱員。由於受規管 considered. 活動涉及廣泛的範圍和不同類別的受 在諮詢文件中，保監局表示它建議 規管人士，保險業者須仔細檢視「指 For example, the original intention was 在施加罰款和確保「有效、相稱及 引草擬稿」可如何適用於參與其業務 for the financial eligibility limits for legal 公平」方面採取平衡做法。「指引 的受規管人士，以及在諮詢過程中把 aid to be reviewed annually to take 草擬稿」列出了保監局建議在施加 握機會，澄清各項需要澄清的事項。 account of general price movements 罰款及罰款金額方面須考慮的一些 and every two years to take account of 因素，包括： 最後，不可忽略的一點是：讓受規 increases in litigation costs. 管人士有表達其看法的機會。保監 • 行為的性質、嚴重性及影響：該 局須提供合理機會，讓受規管人士 When the government proposed to 行為是否蓄意、罔顧後果或疏 表達其看法。然而，關於所建議的 adopt the consumer price index as the 忽；該行為的持續時間及頻密程 程序，以及其是否與自我監管組織 basis to adjust the financial eligibility 度；損失及損失風險；對行業的 的現行紀律程序有所不同（例如在 limits in about 2017 this was not the 影響、該行為是否涉及違反受信 紀律聆訊過程中，中介人是否有權 correct comparison for the purposes 責任、信託或金融罪行。 直接向投訴者提問？），目前仍缺 of adjustment. Private litigation costs 乏相關細節。 (for civil proceedings) increased by • 其後的行為：報告的方式、合作 approximately 44 percent at the 程度、採取的補救措施。 - 林道儒，孖士打律師行香港辦事處保險 beginning of 2018 after the long-awaited 及再保險業務合夥人 adjustments to benchmark solicitors’ • 過往紀律處分紀錄及合規情況。 Jenny Yu，孖士打律師行香港辦事處保 hourly rates for court work were 險業務律師 announced. Even that headline figure was • 其他因素：該名人士的財政資 less than the approximately 55 percent 源、任何民事或刑事訴訟的結 increase in hourly rates recommended in 果。 2013 by an independent report.
保監局亦會考慮與下列有關的情況： PROFESSION Therefore, real inflation measured by the cost of legal services (to reflect, • 商號：該商號的內部監控程序及 Legal Aid Funding and Inflation for example, commercial rents and 風險管理系統是否存在系統性問 employment costs) has increased 題。 The recently announced increase significantly more than the price of to the Legal Aid budget confirms consumer and household goods. In • 個人：該名人士的行業經驗以及 that legal aid expenditure should reviewing increases to the financial 是否違反信託職位。 increase by approximately 41 percent eligibility limits for legal aid a more for 2019/20. It is expected that the appropriate comparison would be 由於受規管活動涉及廣泛的範圍和 increased funding will be used to pay with the increase in the cost of court 不同類別的受規管人士，保監局決 for anticipated increases in the cost of proceedings if the individual were 定在施加罰款方面不採取定額基礎 legal aid cases. employing lawyers privately – not with 方法，因其不大可能達至有效、相 the increase in the cost of a basket of 稱或公平的結果。 The headline figure sounds impressive groceries.
評論 諮詢工作於去年底結束，目前仍在 等候諮詢總結的發表。鑒於保監局 的目標，是要確保罰款有效、公平 和相稱，「指引草擬稿」在施加罰 款方面，為保監局提供了一個寬泛 的框架。
保監局享有的權力，比現時監管保 險中介人的自我監管組織所享有的 為廣。保險中介人及保險公司應仔 細研究「指引草擬稿」所列的各項 因素，及考慮其是否合適和恰當。
此外，受規管活動涵蓋廣泛的活動， 範圍超出傳統保險代理人及經紀以
58 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • INDUSTRY INSIGHTS 業界透視
The number of litigants in person in 總體數字聽起來令人有點驚駭，但 單、索引和分頁文件﹚，以及 court cases in Hong Kong is probably 與以往一樣，這裏有一個背景需要 其他問題，都是從業人員就該計 not unrelated to the financial eligibility 考慮。 劃提出的一連串評論意見中的一 requirements. There is also the point 部分。這些不足之處並非無法克 that good legal representation assists 例如，當局的原意是每年檢討法律 服。」 the courts and over time helps develop 援助的財務資格限額，以顧及一般 the law for all stakeholders. 的價格變動，並每兩年檢討一次法 - David Smyth, RPC 律援助的財務資格限額，以顧及訴 Attention also now turns to other 訟費用的增加。 aspects of the legal aid scheme, including: 在2017年左右，政府提出將居民消 費物價指數作為調整財務資格限額 PROFESSION • expansion of the scope of 的依據，但這並不是一個正確的調 supplementary legal aid generally 整比較。2018年初，在宣佈了期待 Professional Indemnity Ought and, in particular, to include claims 已久的對法庭工作律師每小時基準 to Cover Pro Bono Legal against the incorporated owners of 費率的調整後，私人訴訟費用﹙民 Services multi-storey buildings (topical in 事訴訟費用﹚增加了約44%。即使 light of the increased risk of extreme 這是一總體數字，也低於2013年一 It is gratifying to observe that more weather conditions) and claims to 份獨立報告建議的每小時約55%的 and more lawyers are willing to provide protect consumer rights arising out 費率增幅。 pro bono legal services to the needy of the sale of goods and services; public. At present, there are over 1,000 and 因此，以法律服務成本﹙例如反映 volunteer lawyers participating in the 商業租金和僱傭成本﹚衡量的實際 Government funded Free Legal Advice • improvements to processes for 通貨膨脹的增幅遠遠超過消費品和 Scheme under the Duty Lawyer Service payment of assigned solicitors’ 家用產品的價格。在檢討提高獲得 to provide free preliminary legal advice costs, summarised in the President’s 法律援助的財務資格限額時，更適 to members of the public without means Message in the April 2019 edition of 當的比較應是個人私下僱用律師時 testing at nine District Offices, handling the Hong Kong Lawyer: 法院訴訟費用的增加，而不是一籃 over 6,000 cases per year. In 2013, the 子食品雜貨費用的增加。 Law Society launched a Free Legal “Streamlining Work Process Helpline (Tel: 8200 8002) where solici- … The substantial delay in assessing 在香港的法庭案件中，親自出庭的 tors would offer free legal advice to the the final bills of costs, the lack 訴訟人的數目，可能與財務資格的 public on matters relating to personal of transparency in assessments 規定不無關係。還有一點是，良好 injuries, matrimonial law, criminal law of bills, prolonged delay in bills 的法律代表有助於法院，而且長遠 and mediation, and so far more than payments, duplicated or excessive 而言，也有助於為所有持分者制定 8,000 calls have been handled. In addi- requests of information during the 法律。 tion, various non-governmental organi- bills assessment process, eg the sations and offices of the Legislative itemised bills, index and paginated 現在大家還將注意力轉向法律援助 and District Councillors have also been bundle of documents referred to in 計劃的其他方面，包括： engaging solicitors in providing different the narrative bills, and others are forms of free legal advice and consulta- among a long list of comments · 擴大補充法律援助的一般範圍， tion services to the public. However, our on the scheme by practitioners. 特別是包括向多層建築物的業主 existing regulatory framework relating These inadequacies are not 立案法團提出的申索﹙因極端天 to professional indemnity coverage was insurmountable.” 氣情況的風險增加而受關注﹚， not designed with pro bono services in 以及保障因售賣貨品和服務而產 mind to ensure that solicitors are suffi- - David Smyth, RPC 生的消費者權益的申索；及 ciently covered when they perform such services. · 《香港律師》2019年4月版「會 專業 長的話」中概述的關於支付指定 The compulsory Professional Indemnity 律師費用的程序的改進： under the Solicitors (Professional 法律援助的資金及通貨膨脹 Indemnity) Rules (Cap. 159M) (“the 「簡化工作流程 Indemnity Rules”) covers only legal 最近宣佈的增加法律援助預算，確 …在評估最終訟費單時出現的重 services provided by a solicitor as 定2019年/2020年的法律援助支出 大延誤、賬單評估缺乏透明度、 part of the practice of a law firm. On 1 應增加約41%。預計增加的資金將 賬單付款長期拖延、在賬單評估 August 2016, the Law Society drew 用於支付預計增加的法律援助案件 過程中重複或過度要求提供信息 its members’ attention that if the pro 費用。 ﹙如敘述性賬單中提到的逐項賬 bono legal services are offered in the
www.hk-lawyer.org 59 • May 2019
solicitor’s personal capacity and not as part of the practice of a law firm, the pro bono services will not be covered by the Indemnity, and in such circumstances, in order not to breach r. 6(1) of the Indemnity Rules, an exemption must be obtained pursuant to r. 7 of those Rules (see Circular 16-609). Guidelines for application for such an exemption have been promulgated, but it seems that it LEGAL does not work well in practice, as so far few applications have been made and no exemption has been granted. One major obstacle is the requirement that ADVICE the organisation which engages the volunteer solicitors to provide the pro bono legal services must have profes- sional indemnity insurance in a manner and to an extent similar to that provided in the Indemnity Rules. But it seems 專業 號」）。儘管關於申請該豁免的指 unrealistic in practice for individual 引已經發出，但看來成效不彰，因 NGOs and offices of the Legislative 專業彌償應涵蓋公益法律服務 直至目前為止，提出申請的數目並 and District Councillors to negotiate 不多，更遑論作出任何豁免。其 separately with insurance companies 現時有愈來愈多律師願意向有需要的 中一個主要障礙，是由於有如下的 and purchase the requisite professional 市民提供公益法律服務，這確是一個 規定：邀請義務律師提供公益法律 indemnity insurance. 可喜現象。目前有超過1,000名義務 服務的機構，其必須在方式和範圍 律師參與在當值律師服務下，由政府 上，投購與《彌償規則》所規定的 One easy solution is for the Government 資助的免費法律諮詢計劃，於九間 類似的專業彌償保險。然而，要求 to purchase a Master Professional 民政事務處向公眾人士提供免入息審 每個非政府機構及立法會議員和區 Indemnity Insurance Policy to cover all 查的初步法律諮詢服務，每年處理 議員辦事處個別與保險公司商議和 solicitors (including in-house solicitors) 的個案超過6,000宗。香港律師會於 投購所須的專業彌償保險，這看來 who provide pro bono legal services 2013年設立免費法律諮詢專線（電 並不可行。 to the public under any legitimate 話號碼：8200 8002），由律師就 scheme run by NGOs and offices of 人身傷害、婚姻法、刑事法、調解等 解決這問題的一個較易方法，是由 the Legislative and District Councillors 事宜，向公眾提供免費法律諮詢，至 政府購備一份專業彌償保險總保 and endorsed by the Law Society. The 今已處理了8,000多個來電。此外， 單，為所有根據非政府組織及立法 endorsement requirement can help to 各個非政府組織及立法會議員和區議 會議員和區議員辦事處所推行的， make sure that the pro bono services 員辦事處也邀請律師以不同方式，向 並獲香港律師會認可的合法計劃， provided are legitimate and comply 公眾提供免費法律意見和諮詢服務。 向市民提供公益法律服務的律師（ with all applicable professional ethical 然而，現時與專業彌償保險有關的監 包括企業法律顧問）提供保障。該 standards and requirements, including 管架構，在設立時並沒有將公益服務 項認可規定，有助確保所提供的公 but not limited to polices on confiden- 納入考慮範圍，以確保律師在從事該 益服務皆為合法，並符合所有適用 tiality, record keeping and conflict of 等服務時獲提供充分保障。 的專業道德標準及規定（包括但不 interests so that an exemption from the 限於與保密、紀錄保存、利益衝突 Indemnity Rules can be granted by the 《律師(專業彌償)規則》（第159 M 等有關的政策），從而讓律師會理 Law Society Council under r. 7. 章）（《彌償規則》）下的強制性 事會可根據第7條批准免除遵從《彌 專業彌償，只涵蓋律師所提供的， 償規則》。 It is hoped that Government can do more 作為律師事務所業務範圍其中一部 to encourage more members of the 分的法律服務。香港律師會於2016 我們期望政府採取更積極做法，以 legal profession to volunteer to provide 年8月1日提醒會員注意，有關的公 鼓勵法律界更多成員向有需要的市 pro bono legal services to the needy 益法律服務假如是由律師以個人身 民義務提供公益法律服務，從而促 public to improve the access to justice 份提供，而並非律師事務所業務範 進司法公義，並為在法律面前人人 and contribute towards upholding the 圍的一部分，它們並不受專業彌償 平等這項價值的秉持作出貢獻。 value of everyone being equal before 的保障。在這情況下，為了避免違 the law. 反《彌償規則》第6(1)條，故必須 - 張達明，香港大學 取得該等規則第7條所訂明的豁免 - Eric TM Cheung, The University of Hong Kong （參看「香港律師會通告第16-609
60 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • INDUSTRY INSIGHTS 業界透視
REGULATORY & COMPLIANCE The statutory disciplinary scheme under governed by the Architects Registration the Architects Registration Ordinance Ordinance, the general observations “Duty to Give Reasons” (Cap. 408) provides for a “two-tier” of the Court of Appeal are a salutary scheme – namely, before an Inquiry reminder for every member who sits on The judgment of the Court of Appeal Committee makes a disciplinary order a disciplinary board or tribunal in Hong in Lok Man Fai v Architects Registration its findings and proposed order must Kong. Board [2019] HKCA 405 is an important be confirmed by a Review Committee. reminder of the general requirement In order for the Review Committee to - Michael Maguiness, Of Counsel, RPC that a statutory body which carries function as a review body the decision out a disciplinary function should give of the Inquiry Committee should include written reasons for its findings. Given written reasons for its findings before 監管及合規 the numerous statutory tribunals that being sent to the Review Committee. exist in Hong Kong, and the disciplinary 「提供理由的責任」 procedures that come with them, the As with many disciplinary proceedings in judgment should be of interest to an Hong Kong, the Ordinance provides for 上訴法庭在Lok Man Fai v Architects array of different industries, trades and a statutory right of appeal to the Court Registration Board [2019] HKCA professions. of Appeal. 405一案的判決，是法定紀律處分機 構應就其所作裁定提供書面理由這 Citing several leading Hong Kong and As a result of the inadequacies in 項一般性規定的重要提醒。香港有 English appeal cases, the judgment the Inquiry Committee’s decision, 眾多法定審裁庭及相關紀律處分程 of the Court of Appeal summarises the Court of Appeal ordered that the 序，上述判決相信會引起各不同行 the importance of the requirement for disciplinary proceedings be remitted 業和專業的關注。 disciplinary committees to give reasons to a differently constituted Inquiry for their findings. It is not enough that Committee to consider the complaint 上訴法庭在上述判決中，援引了數 a disciplinary committee sets out its afresh. Interestingly, given the “two-tier” 過重要的香港及英國上訴案例，並 findings alone. The statutory or common disciplinary process, the Court of Appeal 綜述紀律委員會須就其所作裁定提 law requirement that a disciplinary did not consider that it was for it (as an 供理由的重要性。紀律委員會不可 committee must give supporting reasons appellate court) to remit the matter back 只宣告其所作的裁定，因成文法或 enables a respondent: (i) to know why a to the Inquiry Committee for reasons or 普通法規定，紀律委員會須就其所 disciplinary committee (often made up supplemental reasons to be given – that 作裁定提供支持理由，讓答辯人 of his or her peers) decided as it did; and was a matter for the Review Committee 可：(i)知悉紀律委員會（通常由業內 (ii) to consider whether to appeal to a before service of the relevant order on 人士組成）作出相關決定的原因； review body or court. the registered architect and it was too 及(ii)考慮是否向覆核機構或法院提 late to exercise that power once the 出上訴。 As with an appeal from a lower court to Review Committee had confirmed the a higher court, a disciplinary committee Inquiry Committee’s decision. 就如自下級法院向上級法院提出上 need not set out every factor which 訴的情況一般，紀律委員會不須就 weighed on its deliberations. However, Whether a court can generally order a 其研判過程中所考慮的每項因素作 there is a requirement for a disciplinary disciplinary committee to give written 出交待。然而，紀律委員會須將其 committee to record those matters reasons (as opposed to remitting the 裁定中的重要事項記錄下來，尤其 which are material to its findings; case back to a differently constituted 是該裁定假如會導致作出監管懲處 especially where those findings result in disciplinary committee) primarily 的話。 a regulatory sanction. depends on the statutory regime in question. In this case, it is clear that 在Lok Man Fai v Architects In Lok Man Fai v Architects Registration even if the Court of Appeal considered Registration Board一案中，由研訊 Board, the relevant decision of an that it had the power to order the Inquiry 委員會作出，並由覆核委員會確認 Inquiry Committee as confirmed by a Committee to give written reasons it was 的該項決定，並未附有相關裁決理 Review Committee does not appear reluctant to do so because: (i) this was a 由。該等裁定是關於上訴人被指在 to have set out the reasons for its case where no reasons had been given, 某一與裝修項目有關的工程中存在 findings. Those findings contained rather than inadequate reasons; and (ii) 不足之處所下的多個結論，但並未 numerous conclusions concerning it would be difficult for the same Inquiry 就所作決定提供支持的證據或雙方 alleged inadequacies in the appellant’s Committee to go back in time in order to 爭辯的內容。 work, apparently with respect to a establish the actual (albeit unexpressed) refurbishment project, but the decision reasons for its findings. 《建築師註冊條例》（第408章）下 does not appear to have set out the 的法定紀律處分機制是一個「兩層 supporting evidence or the competing While the judgment relates to an appeal 次」架構，亦即是：研訊委員會在 submissions. arising from disciplinary proceedings 作出紀律處分命令之前，其裁定和
www.hk-lawyer.org 61 • May 2019
taxes and have specific implications on e-commerce.
Preamble Over the past 10 years, many MNCs maintain their headquarters running administrative and/or financial functions in Hong Kong, but with business operation carried out largely in the rest of the Asia Pacific.
Those business revenues are booked in the name of their Hong Kong headquarters, and consolidated through banks in Hong Kong.
In the Li & Fung case, the tax authority sought to charge tax on 100 percent of the profits on the grounds that such 建議作出的命令，須先取得覆核委 該項判決雖與在《建築師註冊條 revenue had been generated in Hong 員會的確認。為了讓覆核委員會履 例》下的紀律程序所提出的上訴有 Kong, reasoning that the profits had 行其覆核職能，研訊委員會在將其 關，但上訴庭所作的該項概括性評 been generated through “a commission 裁定提交覆核委員會的同時，應一 論，是對香港各紀律委員會及審裁 agent” of the Company. 併提供書面理由。 庭的每一成員的善意提醒。 This assertion was however strongly 與香港的許多紀律程序一樣，《條 - Michael Maguiness, RPC特邀律師 resisted by the Company by reason that 例》訂明當事人享有向上訴法庭提 those profits were not “… (wholly) derived 出上訴的法定權利。 from or in Hong Kong …” – thus set the stage for the discussion what ought 由於研訊委員會的決定存在不足之 to be considered as ‘profits generated 處，上訴庭命令發還相關紀律程 TAXATION within the jurisdiction’. 序，並改由一個以不同成員組成的 研訊委員會重新審視有關投訴。有 e-Commerce & Tax – The Locality The Decision 趣的是，上訴庭認為基於該「兩層 Factor In a nutshell, the IRD’s claim failed. 次」的紀律處分程序，而它作為一 The Courts agreed with the Company 個審理上訴案件的法庭，不適宜由 The recent dilemma of the Inland that as foreign clients of the Company 它來命令將案件發還研訊委員會， Revenue Services’ attempt to tax both were handled by “foreign entities” 其理由或補充理由是：這是在相關 the Duchess of Cambridge and their with specified contractual obligations, 命令送達該註冊建築師之前，由覆 royal baby highlights how even royals even though the eventual profits had 核委員會負責處理的一項事宜，覆 cannot escape the need for good tax been booked under the name of their 核委員會一旦確認了研訊委員會的 planning. Hong Kong headquarters, such income 決定，要行使該權力是為時已晚。 generated, under this case’s specific In the case of Commissioner of Inland circumstances, was nonetheless 法庭是否有權命令紀律委員會提供 Revenue V. Li & Fung (Trading) Ltd deemed to be “foreign”. 書面理由（而非將案件發還一個由 [2011] HKCFI 261; HCIA 3/2010 (18 April 不同成員組成的紀律委員會處理） 2011), the Courts found in favour of the As a result, said foreign income was NOT ，這在一般情況下，主要視乎有關 Company, a multi-national corporation taxable. It was therefore emphasised 的法定機制而定。在上述案件中， (“MNC”), where it affirmed the principle that the Company “only had to pay tax 很明顯的情況是，上訴庭倘若認 that the gist of the tax charging on income specifically generated in 為它有權命令研訊委員會提供書 legislation is that only “… profits derived Hong Kong” 面理由，它也不願如此實行，原 from or in Hong Kong are subject to tax 因是：(i)這是一宗並無提供任何理 …” under s. 14 of the Inland Revenue IRD’s Dissent: The Brain Factor 由，而並非理由不充分的案件；及 Ordinance. It was argued by the IRD that the (ii)要由同一個研訊委員會回溯先前 use of a ‘brain’ analogy or the place 情況，就其所作的裁定確立實際的 This ruling had resulted in the Inland of administration of the business （儘管未表達）理由，這顯然並非 Revenue Department’s revision of their as criteria for ascertaining the 易事。 internal guidelines for the assessment of geographical source of profits
62 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • INDUSTRY INSIGHTS 業界透視
is plainly inconsistent with the 2. The location of servers (if not 稅務 decisions in Commissioner of Income located in Hong Kong); likewise, Tax, Bombay Presidency and Aden v the location of the operational 電子商務及稅務–地區因素 Chunilal B Mehta of Bombay [1938] LR teams such as IT and customer 65 IA 332 and CIR v Hang Seng Bank service; 稅務部最近試圖向劍橋公爵夫人及 Ltd [1990] 1 HKRC. 皇室小成員徵稅，結果進退兩難， 3. The majority of the marketing and 突顯人人都需要做好稅務計劃，即 In a case like the present, source is logistic operations (if any) are not 連皇室成員也不例外。 “determined by the nature and situs of carried out by the Hong Kong office; the profit-producing transaction and and 在Commissioner of Inland Revenue not by where the taxpayer’s business V. Li & Fung (Trading) Ltd [2011] is administered or its commercial 4. The key personnel are not located HKCFI 261案（HCIA 3/2010 decisions taken.” in, or otherwise travel frequently out ，2011年4月18日），原訟法庭裁 of, Hong Kong. 定一間跨國公司勝訴，在審訊過程 The Court of Appeal however 中確認一個原則，就是根據《稅務 accepted that “one looks to see what Take Away Points 條例》第14條，只有「得自香港的 the taxpayer has done to earn the Ultimately, the subject company 利潤或是在香港的利潤須課稅」； profit in question and where he has eventually managed to scale down 這是徵稅法例的要旨。 done it”. its tax charge rate from 16 percent down to a much lower percentage 這次裁斷令稅務局得修訂評稅內 In this case, distinctions were specifically (which is substantial savings for most 部指引，對電子商務也產生具體影 drawn between ‘profit generating MNCs). 響。 services’ and activities which ‘although commercially essential to operations do With the evolution of the internet in 序言 not provide the legal test for ascertaining today’s day and age, the application 過去十年，有很多跨國公司將負責 the geographical source of profit’ (ie of this decision will therefore put the 管理行政及∕財政職能的總部設於 back-office activities). question to many MNCs to consider 香港，經營業務的工作則大部分在 whether it is more advantageous 亞太其他地區進行。 It is therefore trite law that “… senior to move their entire business to administrative staff headquartered in cyberspace. 相關業務收益入帳到香港總部名 Hong Kong who oversaw the activities 下，在香港透過銀行綜合處理。 of various overseas affiliates within the A modernised practice as observed in group … is not the appropriate test for the Li & Fung case is that companies 在Li & Fung案，稅務機關推論， ascertaining the geographical location of may attempt to conduct “Tax Parking”, a 涉案利潤是透過公司的「佣金代理 a profit.”. practice involved by paying tax to: 公司」產生的，因此以相關收益是 在香港產生為由，徵收100%利得 The Conclusion – The Move to 1. a low or nil e-commerce tax rate 稅。 Cyberspace jurisdiction (ie Malta or Cyprus); Since the ruling in the Li & Fung failing which 可是，涉案公司斷然否定這個主 case, several Court of Final Appeal 張，反對的理由是，那些利潤不 judgments seem to have confirmed such 2. a tax jurisdiction where tax 是「（全完）得自香港……或是 approach with those MNCs succeeded in assessment is flexible or negotiable. 在香港的」――這就鋪設了討論 minimising their tax exposure to a large 的台階，探討有些什麼是必須考 extent. The fact that such case or practice exists 慮為「在司法管轄區內產生的利 also puts the question to law makers as 潤」。 Similar reasoning applies to companies to whether Hong Kong has positioned running e-commerce, which maintain itself as sufficiently friendly towards 判決 a Hong Kong (headquarter) office e-commerce, wherein, if the policy 簡言之，稅務局申索失敗。涉案公 running adminstrative and finance in Hong Kong is more e-commerce 司認為，由於公司的外國客戶由「 functions. The relevant elements are as friendly, such MNCs may desire to 外國實體」處理，「外國實體」有 follows: return to Hong Kong as opposed to 具體的合約義務，在這宗案的具體 arguing in Court against the IRD that 情況下，雖然最終利潤一向入帳到 1. The contract with individual their operation is overseas to begin 香港總部名下，但是所產生的收入 customers was made in the with. 卻一直被當作為「外國」收入。原 “cyberspace” or at best the physical 訟法庭認同這一點。 locality of the consumer but not in - Mr. Joshua Chu, Consultant, (Hong Kong); Hong Kong; Ms. Anna Lau, Consultant, (Hong Kong) 結果是，上述外國收入無須課稅。
www.hk-lawyer.org 63 • May 2019
因此，重點是公司「只須就那些明 確地在香港產生的收入納稅」。
稅務局的不同觀點：「腦袋」是一 個因素 稅務局的爭論點是，用「腦袋」 作類比或業務管理地作為確定利 潤地理來源的準則，完全不符合 Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay Presidency and Aden v Chunilal B Mehta of Bombay [1938] LR 65 IA 332及CIR v Hang Seng Bank Ltd [1990] 1 HKRC的 裁決。
在Li & Fung案一類的案件，來源是 「按產生利潤的交易所屬性質和發 生地點來決定的，不是按納稅人管 理業務或作出商業決定的所在地決 定的。」
然而，上訴法庭認為「要看的是納 稅人做過些什麼才賺到有關利潤， 以及他是在哪裏做的」。 3. 大部分市場及物流運作（如有） 1. 向電子商務稅率低，甚至是零（ 不是由香港辦事處負責；及 即馬耳他或塞浦路斯）的管轄區 在這宗案，「產生利潤的服務」跟 納稅；若不然 「在商業上對營運必不可少，但不 4. 主要人員不用駐守香港，又或者 提供用來確定利潤地理來源的法律 經常要出差離開香港。 2. 向評稅靈活或可商議的稅收管轄 測試」的活動（即後勤部門）的差 區納稅。 別，給具體區分了出來。 全文重點 最終，計算標的公司利得稅的稅率 上述案件或現有做法亦引發議員思 因此，在法律上，「駐守香港總 由16%降低至遠低於16%（對於跨 考一個問題，那就是，香港是否已 部，負責監督集團海外相關聯公司 國公司來說，這節省了大筆開支）。 經做好準備，以十足友善的態度走 的活動的高級管理層員工……不 向電子商務年代，如果香港有關電 是適合用來確定利潤地理位置的測 今時今日，這個年代，隨着互聯網 子商務的政策更為友善，上述同類 試」。這是老生常談。 不斷演進，這次判決將引發許多跨 的跨國公司就可能願意回歸香港， 國公司思考一個問題：把業務統統 而不是在法庭與稅務局爭論，辯稱 結論 – 走進網絡空間 搬進網絡空間去，會否是利多弊少？ 公司最初是在海外開始運作的。 自從Li & Fung案有了裁斷之後，不 少由終審法院作出的判決似乎都確 從Li & Fung案可見到一種現代化的 - 顧問朱喬華（香港） 定這種處理方法；跨國公司獲判勝 做法，那就是，公司可以嘗試「稅 顧問劉敏廷（香港） 訴，稅務負擔給大幅減至最輕。 款停泊」（Tax Parking），方法如 下： 類似的觀點適用於經營電子商務的 公司，這些公司將負責行政及財政 職能的（總部）辦事處設於香港。 Feel free to write in to us with more short contributions on latest industry 相關要素如下： developments and trends. Simply contact the editor at: [email protected] 1. 與個別客戶的合約是在「網絡空 本刊歡迎各位提交短篇文章，與廣大讀者分享業界的最新發展和動態。 間」締定的，或絕大多數是在客 請與本刊編輯聯絡。電郵：[email protected] 戶身處地區締定的，但不是在香 港締定； The information provided here is intended to give general information only. It is not a complete 2. 伺服器所在位置（如果不是在香 statement of the law. It is not intended to be relied upon or to be a substitute for legal advice in 港）；同樣地，營運團隊（例如 relation to particular circumstances. 資訊技術部）及客戶服務所在位 本欄所提供的資訊僅屬一般資訊，並不構成相關法律的完整陳述，亦不應被依賴為任何個案中 置； 的法律意見或被視作取代法律意見。
64 www.hk-lawyer.org
• May 2019
CASES IN BRIEF 案例撮要
ARBITRATION to enforce the Award under s. 2GG of a reasonable time depended on the Arbitration Ordinance (Cap. 341) the terms of the award as well as CL v SCG (“AO”) (“Order”). SCG applied to set the facts and circumstances of the aside the Order, arguing that it was case. On the facts here, a reason- [2019] HKCFI 398 time-barred by the six-year limitation able time for payment lapsed at period under s. 4(1)(c) of the Limitation the latest by 8 April 2011, ie 21 days Court of First Instance Ordinance (Cap. 347) (“LO”). CL re- after CL’s demand for payment. The lied on Art. 2 of the Arrangement Con- six-year limitation period expired Construction and Arbitration cerning Mutual Enforcement of Arbitral on 8 April 2017. (See paras. 16–17, Proceedings No 9 of 2018 Awards between the Mainland and the 21.) Hong Kong Special Administrative Re- Mimmie Chan J in Chambers gion (the “Arrangement”), which pro- 3) However unfair the consequence, 6 November 2018, 18 February 2019 hibits the filing of applications for en- there was no express provision in forcement with the relevant courts on the Arrangement, the AO or the the Mainland and in Hong Kong at the LO that the time limit for enforce- Arbitration — limitation — enforcement same time. CL submitted that the ac- ment of an arbitral award should of arbitral award — application in 2018 crual of its cause of action was sus- not run during the successful par- to enforce Hong Kong arbitral award pended pending the final determina- ty’s application for enforcement on published in 2011 — application in 2011 tion of its enforcement application on the Mainland. Any remedy to this to enforce award in Mainland China fi- the Mainland. effect could only be provided by nally rejected in 2016 — whether ap- statutory amendment. Until then, plication in Hong Kong time-barred Held, granting SCG’s application and applicants could consider with- under six-year limitation period under setting aside the Order, that: drawing and procuring determina- Limitation Ordinance (Cap. 347) s. 4(1) tion of a pending enforcement ap- (c) — date when cause of action ac- 1) In a common law action on an arbi- plication on the Mainland, before crued — whether time not to run during tral award, the time limit ran from applying for enforcement in Hong period when application made for en- the time the defendant failed to Kong before the expiry of the rel- forcement on Mainland honour the implied promise in the evant limitation period. (See para. underlying contract to perform the 21.) CL, a Hong Kong company, brought award. Thus, the cause of action ac- arbitration proceedings in Hong Kong crued “from the breach occasioned 4) Accordingly, enforcement of the concerning a contract dispute against by the defendant’s failure to honour Award was barred by s. 4(1)(c) of SCG, a Mainland Chinese company. On the award when called upon to do the LO when these proceedings for 17 February 2011, the Arbitral Tribu- so” (Agromet v Moulden Engineering leave for enforcement in Hong Kong nal ordered SCG to pay USD2,173,000 Ltd [1985] 1 WLR 762, Xiamen Xin- were instituted on 6 February 2018. and interest “forthwith” to CL (the jingdi Group Ltd v Eton Properties (See para. 22.) “Award”). On 18 March 2011, CL de- Ltd [2016] HKLRD 1106 applied). manded immediate payment which (See para. 11.) Application was ignored. In July 2011, CL applied This was a hearing on the application of to the Shenzhen Court to enforce the 2) Here, the cause of action based the respondent to determine the pre- Award, which was opposed by SCG, on the implied promise accrued to liminary issue of whether enforcement and such proceedings were finally de- CL when SCG failed to make pay- of an arbitral award against it was time- termined and dismissed in March 2016. ment within a reasonable time of barred under s. 4(1)(c) of the Limitation In February 2018, CL successfully ap- the publication of the Award and Ordinance (Cap. 347). The facts are set plied to the Hong Kong Court for leave demands being made. What was out in the judgment.
66 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • CASES IN BRIEF 案例撮要
決的字眼。根據這宗案的事實， 付款的合理時間最遲在2011年8 月8日就終止，即是CL要求付款後 21天。六年時效期在2017年4月8 日屆滿。（見第16–17、21段）
3) 無論結果怎樣不公平，《執行安 排》或《仲裁條例》或《時效條 例》都沒有明文規定，執行仲裁 裁決的時效不應該在仲裁勝方在 內地申請執行裁決的期間繼續計 算。只有法定修訂才可就這個引 起的後果提供補救方法。在此之 前，申請人可在相關時效期未屆 滿之前，還未在香港申請執行裁 決之時，考慮撤回在內地待決的 執行申請，也考慮促致待決執行 申請的裁定。（見第21段）
仲裁 但是項申請遭SCG反對；經法院裁斷 4) 因此，根據《時效條例》第4(1) 後，相關訴訟最終在2016年3月被撤 (c)條的規定，2018年2月6日當 銷。2018年2月，CL根據《仲裁條 事人在香港展開訴訟，提出執行 CL v SCG 例》（第341章）第2GG條，向香港 仲裁裁決的許可申請時，仲裁裁 法院申請執行仲裁裁決的許可，結果 決的執行已經逾時失效。（見第 [2019] HKCFI 398 申請獲批（「該命令」）。SCG申請 22段） 原訟法庭 擱置該命令，辯稱根據《時效條例》 （第347章）第4(1)(c)條的六年時效 聆訊答辯人的申請 建築及仲裁訴訟2018年第9號 期，CL的申請逾時失效。CL以《關 這是一宗聆訊申請的案件。答辯人 於內地與香港特別行政區相互執行仲 提出申請，要求法庭裁斷一個初 高等法院原訟法庭法官陳美蘭內 裁裁決的安排》（「《執行安排》」 步爭議點，那就是，根據《時效條 庭聆訊 第二條為依據。根據《執行安排》， 例》（第347章）第4(1)(c)條，針對 當事人不得同時分別向中港兩地有關 答辯人執行的仲裁裁決是否逾時失 2018年11月6日、2019年2月 法院提出申請。CL陳詞說，在內地 效？案情已在判決書詳細列出。 18日 法院就執行申請作出最終裁定前，其 訴訟因由的產生被暫停。 仲裁 — 時效 — 仲裁裁決的執行 — 2018年為了執行2011年公布的香 裁決 –批准SCG的申請，把該命令 港仲裁裁決而提出的申請 — 2011 作廢： CIVIL PROCEDURE 年為了在中國內地執行仲裁裁決而 提出的申請最終在2016年被拒接納 1) 在關於仲裁裁決的普通法訴訟 — 根據《時效條例》（第347章） 中，時限由被告人不兌現相關 Giorgio Armani SPA v Elan Clothes 第4(1)(c)條的六年時效期，在香港 合約的隱含承諾，不履行裁決 Co Ltd 提出的申請是否已經逾時失效 — 產 之時開始計算。因此，訴訟因由 [2019] HKCFI 530 生訴訟因由的日期 — 為了在內地執 產生自「被告人因為沒有按要 行仲裁裁決而提出申請的那段時間 求履行裁決而違規之時」（引用 Court of First Instance 是否不計算在內 Agromet v Moulden Engineering Ltd [1985] 1 WLR 762 Construction and Arbitration CL是香港公司，SCG是內地一間 、Xiamen Xinjingdi Group Ltd Proceedings No 71 of 2018 中資公司。CL和SCG發生合約糾 v Eton Properties Ltd [2016] 紛，CL就此在香港向SCG提出仲裁訴 HKLRD 1106）。（見第11段） Deputy High Court Judge Field in 訟。2011年2月17日，仲裁庭命令 Chambers SCG「立即」向CL支付2,173,000美 2) 在這宗案，CL的訴訟因由以隱含 28 January, 27 February 2019 元及利息（「仲裁裁決」）。2011 承諾為基礎，是在SCG不在仲裁 年3月18日，CL要求SCG立刻付款， 裁決已公布，並且CL提出過付款 但不獲理會。2011年7月，CL向深 要求後的合理時間內付款的時候 Civil procedure — conflict of laws — an- 圳市中級人民法院（「深圳法院」 產生的。何謂合理時間，除了案 ti-suit injunction to restrain Mainland ）提出申請，要求執行仲裁裁決， 件的事實和環境之外，取決於裁 Chinese proceedings based on Hong
www.hk-lawyer.org 67 • May 2019
Kong arbitration agreement — con- struction of arbitration clause — pre- sumption that parties intended dispute arising out of their relationship be de- cided by same tribunal — strongly ar- guable case that other defendants in Mainland proceedings were parties to agreement — tort claim in PRC pro- ceedings fell within arbitration clause — continuation of injunction granted
P was head of a group of companies which manufactured and supplied luxu- ry fashion products. In December 2014, P and D entered into a Master Agree- ment (the “Agreement”) under which D was appointed an authorised retailer with a right to open and operate single brand stores in the PRC. D purchased products from P’s Swiss branch and two as the language used by the parties was a strong argument that the tort authorised distributors (the “Distribu- would permit, to the commercial claim in the Shandong Proceedings tors”). Clause 13.1 of the Agreement pro- purpose of the arbitration clause, fell within Clause 13.1 given: (a) the vided that: “[a]ny dispute, controversy namely, to have disputes that might breadth of its wording; (b) the im- or claim deriving from, arising out and/ arise out of the agreement contain- plicit contention that the acts com- or regarding [the] Agreement … shall be ing the arbitration clause to be de- plained of in the Shandong Pro- settled by arbitration [in Hong Kong] in cided by a chosen tribunal. The con- ceedings were wrongful, at least in accordance with the UNCITRAL Arbitra- struction of an arbitration clause part, because the rebranding was tion Rules...” In February 2017, GA, who should therefore start with the pre- not permitted under the Agree- controlled P, announced that two of the sumption that the parties, as ration- ment; and (c) the pleaded damage brands (the “Brands”) covered under the al businessmen, were likely to have resulted in part from D’s purchase Agreement were to be changed in a re- intended any dispute arising out of products and establishment of branding exercise. D stopped paying of the relationship into which they outlets as required by the Agree- royalties and advertising contributions had entered to be decided by the ment. The acts alleged were argua- which P claimed were due under the same tribunal unless the language bly actionable in Hong Kong as the Agreement. In June 2018, P commenced made it clear that certain questions torts of inducing a breach of con- arbitration in Hong Kong pursuant to were intended to be excluded from tract and/or conspiracy by unlaw- Clause 13.1 seeking a declaration that P the arbitrator’s jurisdiction (Fiona ful means. In any event, it was dis- had validly terminated the Agreement, Trust & Holding Corporation v Prival- tinctly arguable that the exception damages and injunctive relief. In August ov [2007] 4 All ER 951, Incorporat- to the double actionability rule in 2018, D commenced proceedings in the ed Owners of Hamden Court v Mega Boys v Chaplin might apply (Fiona Higher People’s Court of Shandong (the Miles Construction Co Ltd (HCCT Trust & Holding Corporation v Prival- “Shandong Proceedings”) against P, GA 32/2014, [2015] HKEC 1025) ap- ov [2007] 4 All ER 951 applied; Boys and the Distributors, contending that plied). (See paras. 33–34.) v Chaplin [1971] AC 356, Red Sea In- GA’s sudden announcement had re- surance Co Ltd v Bouygues SA [1995] sulted in claims by consumers and loss- 2) There was a strong arguable case 1 AC 190, Donohue v Armco [2002] es to D. In October 2018, P obtained an that the Distributers and GA were 1 Lloyd’s Rep 425, JSC BTA Bank v ex parte interim injunction pursuant to s. parties to the Agreement. It was Khrapunov [2018] UKSC 19 consid- 45(2) of the Arbitration Ordinance (Cap. common ground that they were “Af- ered). (See paras. 36–38, 49–55.) 609) restraining D from taking any fur- filiates” as defined in the Agree- ther step in the Shandong Proceedings. ment. The opening sentence of the Application P applied to continue the anti-suit in- Agreement was a strong pointer This was an application by the plaintiff junction against D. that Armani and its Affiliates were seeking the continuation of an anti-suit each separate parties to it. This was injunction against the defendant based Held, allowing the application, that: reinforced by clauses that provided on an arbitration clause to restrain the that Affiliates were the beneficiaries defendant from continuing legal pro- 1) The approach to construing arbitra- of particular obligations provided ceedings in Mainland China against it. tion clauses was to give effect, so far for in the Agreement. Further, there The facts are set out in the judgment.
68 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • CASES IN BRIEF 案例撮要
民事訴訟程序 一步行動。原告人申請延續禁制被告 v Chaplin [1971] AC 356、Red 人境外訴訟的禁令。 Sea Insurance Co Ltd v Bouygues SA [1995] 1 AC 190、Donohue Giorgio Armani SPA v Elan Clothes 裁決 –批准申請： v Armco [2002] 1 Lloyd’s Co Ltd Rep 425、 JSC BTA Bank v [2019] HKCFI 530 1) 在兩方當事人的用語所允許的情 Khrapunov [2018] UKSC 19） 況下，解釋仲裁條款的方法旨 。（見第36–38、49–55段） 原訟法庭 在執行仲裁條款的商業目的， 那就是，將包含仲裁條款的協議 申請延續禁制令 建築及仲裁訴訟案2018年第71號 可產生的糾紛，交由選定的仲裁 這是一宗申請延續禁制令的案件。 庭作決定。因此，解釋仲裁條款 原告人以仲裁條款為依據，尋求延 高等法院原訟法庭暫委法官Field 應始於一個假設，那就是，兩方 續禁制被告人境外訴訟的命令，目 內庭聆訊 當事人是理智的商人，他們相當 的是禁制被告人繼續在中國內地針 2019年1月28日、2月27日 可能打算將兩方所訂立關係所產 對原告人提出法律程序。案情已在 生的糾紛，交由同一仲裁庭作 判決書詳細列出。 決定；除非用語上清楚表明，雙 民事訴訟程序 — 法律衝突 — 禁制 方打算將某些問題排除於仲裁員 基於香港仲裁協議在中國內地提出訴 的管轄權範圍之外，則作別論。 訟的命令 — 詮釋仲裁條款 — 假設 （引用Fiona Trust & Holding 當事人打算交由同一仲裁庭解決在雙 Corporation v Privalov [2007] CIVIL PROCEDURE 方關係中產生的糾紛 — 有力地可辯 4 All ER 951、Incorporated 證成立的理據：內地訴訟程序的其他 Owners of Hamden Court v Momin Lok v Hospital Authority 被告人是協議的締約方 — 在中國的 Mega Miles Construction Co Ltd 侵權申索訴訟屬於仲裁條款範圍以內 (HCCT 32/2014，[2015] HKEC [2019] HKCFI 466 的事 — 延續已批給的禁制令 1025)）。（見第33–34段） Court of First Instance 原告人是公司集團負責人，該集團製 2) 有一個有力地可辯證成立的理 造及供應高檔時裝產品。2014年12 據：兩家經銷商和GA是主協議 Personal Injuries Action No 981 of 月，原告人和被告人訂立主協議， 的締約方。訴訟雙方同意，按 2014 據此，被告人獲指定為「已獲授權零 照主協議的定義，兩家經銷商 Bharwaney J 售商」，有權在中國開店銷售某單 和GA是「相關聯人士」。主協 一品牌。被告人從原告人的瑞士分 議起首句是一個有力的提示， 19 February 2019 行及兩家已獲授權的經銷商（「兩 讓人知道Armani及其相關聯人 家經銷商」）購入產品。主協議第 士分別是主協議的一方。另有條 13.1條規定，「任何衍生或產生自 款訂明，相關聯人士是主協議訂 Civil evidence — legal professional 主協議及∕或與主協議有關的糾紛、 明的某幾種義務的受益人，這 privilege — waiver — doctrine of par- 爭議或申索，……須[在香港]根據《 些條款加強「分別是主協議的一 tial waiver could not apply to trial of 聯合國國際貿易法委員仲裁規則》 方」之說。再者，一個有力的爭 preliminary issue so as to preserve, at 透過仲裁解決……」。GA在2017年 論是，基於以下三點，在廣東訴 main trial, privilege over documents 2月宣布，兩個在主協議涵蓋之列的 訟程序的侵權申索屬於第13.1 disclosed at trial of preliminary issue 品牌（「兩個品牌」）重新塑造形 條範圍內的事：(a)第13.1條措 象；GA是原告人的控制人。被告人 辭的廣度；(b)隱含的爭議，即 At this trial of preliminary issues of lim- 停止支付專營權費和廣告分擔款項， 那些在廣東訴訟程序被投訴的 itation, the question was whether or 原告人聲稱根據主協議，有關款項 行為是不對的（至少一部分是不 not P could invoke the doctrine of par- 已經到期。2018年6月，原告人根 對），因為重塑品牌形像不是 tial waiver of privilege in respect of privi- 據第13.1條，在香港展開仲裁，要 主協議准許的事；及(c)已作訴 leged documents disclosed for a limited 求仲裁庭宣告原告人終止主協議有 的損害，有部分是被告人按照主 purpose only. The parties accepted that 效，同時要求得到賠償及禁制性濟 協議的規定購買產品及開設商店 there was no authority on whether the 助。2018年8月，被告人在廣東省 而導致的。被指稱的行為可辯證 deployment of privileged documents at 高級人民法院展訴訟程序（「廣東 為一種以非法手段促使違反合約 the trial of the preliminary issue of lim- 訴訟程序」），控告原告人、GA及 及∕或串謀的侵權行為，可以在 itation would result in privilege over 兩家經銷商，指稱GA突如其來的宣 香港提出訴訟。無論如何，確實 those documents being waived for the 告，令被告人遭消費者索償，因而蒙 可爭辯的是，Boys v Chaplin案 purposes of the main trial that would 受損失。2018年10月，原告人以《 的雙重可訴原則的例外情況有 take place if the Court were to displace 仲裁條例》（第609章）第45(2)條 可能適用。（引用Fiona Trust & the limitation period. 為依據，取得單方面臨時禁制令，禁 Holding Corporation v Privalov 制被告人在廣東訴訟程序採取任何進 [2007] 4 All ER 951；考慮Boys Held that the doctrine of partial waiver
www.hk-lawyer.org 69 • May 2019
could not apply to the trial of a prelimi- 放棄保密權利」（partial waiver of CONTEMPT OF COURT nary issue so as to preserve, at the main privilege）的法則。如果法庭排除時 效期不用就會進行主審訊，那麼，享 trial, privilege over documents disclosed La Dolce Vita Fine Dining Co Ltd v Zhang 有保密權的文件在審訊時效期這個初 at the trial of the preliminary issue (British Lan Coal Corporation v Dennis Rye Ltd [1988] 1 步爭議點時被使用了，可會導致文件 WLR 1113, Goldman v Hesper [1988] 1 WLR 的保密權在主審訊中被放棄？各方同 [2019] HKCFI 618 1238, Bourns Inc v Raychem Corporation 意沒有任何相關判例可用。 [1999] 3 All ER 154, B v Auckland District Court of First Instance Law Society [2003] 2 AC 736, Berezovsky 裁決：「局部放棄保密權利」的法則 v Hine [2011] EWCA Civ 1089, Citic Pacific 不可在審訊初步爭議點時引用，不可 Miscellaneous Proceedings Nos Ltd v Secretary for Justice [2012] 2 HKLRD 藉此法則在主審訊中保留審訊初步爭 585 & 586 of 2017 701 considered). (See paras. 14–21.) 議點之時被披露文件的保密權（考慮 Mimmie Chan J British Coal Corporation v Dennis Rye Ltd [1988] 1 WLR 1113、Goldman Ruling 5 March 2019 This was a ruling on a question of law, v Hesper [1988] 1 WLR 1238 following the exchange of written sub- 、Bourns Inc v Raychem Corporation missions, arising in a trial on the prelim- [1999] 3 All ER 154、B v Auckland Contempt of court — civil contempt — inary issue of limitation in a personal in- District Law Society [2003] 2 AC breach of order for disclosure in aid juries action. The facts are set out in the 736、Berezovsky v Hine [2011] of Mareva injunction — serious, delib- judgment. EWCA Civ 1089、Citic Pacific Ltd erate and continuing breach — no at- v Secretary for Justice [2012] 2 tempt to purge contempt — appropri- Editorial note: (1) Although the ques- HKLRD 701）。（見第14–21段） ate penalty tion on which the Court had to rule arose in the context of limitation, the proposi- 裁斷 Ps brought arbitral proceedings in tion which the Court laid down was not 這是一宗裁斷法律問題的案件。在一 Mainland China against D for damag- couched in terms confined to limitation; 宗人身傷害訴訟案中，法庭在雙方交 es arising from its acquisition of shares (2) As appears at para. 23 of the ruling, 換書面陳詞之後，審訊時效期這個初 from D for USD286,815,887. A Mare- the plaintiff was given leave to withdraw, 步爭議點，審訊之時產生了一個法律 va injunction in aid of the arbitration if she wished, the affidavit exhibiting the 問題。案情已在判決書詳細列出。 documents in question. was granted by the Hong Kong Court, requiring D to disclose her assets (the 編者按：(1)儘管法庭所要裁斷的問題 “Order”). Ps claimed D failed to com- 是因應時效問題而產生的，但從措辭看 ply with the Order, and the Hong Kong 民事訴訟程序 來，法庭頒布的判詞不只適用於時效問 Court found D guilty of contempt of 題；(2)正如裁定書第23段所言，原告 court. D indicated she had no submis- 人獲法庭許可，只要她想撤回，就可撤 sions to make on the penalties pro- Momin Lok v Hospital Authority 回她那份陳示了有關文件的誓章。 posed by Ps. Despite the Court’s direc- [2019] HKCFI 466 tions to appear at the Penalty Hearing, D was absent. 原訟法庭
人身傷害訴訟案件2014年第981 號
原訟法庭法官包華禮
2019年2月19日
民事證據 — 法律專業保密權 — 放 棄 —「局部放棄保密權利」的法則 不可在審訊初步爭議點時引用，不 可藉此法則在主審訊中保留審訊初 步爭議點之時被披露文件的保密權
在這次就時效期這個初步爭議點所進 行的審訊上，要處理的問題是，原告 人只是為着有限的目的才披露享有保 密權的文件，她可否就此援引「局部
70 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • CASES IN BRIEF 案例撮要
Held, sentencing D to 12 months’ im- 蔑視法庭 3) 被告人違反該命令是故意的、蓄 prisonment, that: 意的、持續的。她表示過無意遵 從任何由法庭作出的命令，也無 La Dolce Vita Fine Dining Co Ltd v 意抵償蔑視法庭罪。她也沒有表 1) Although D had appealed against Zhang Lan the findings of contempt, unless 現出悔意、願意接受責任或提供 and until they were set aside, the [2019] HKCFI 618 補救方法。此外，被告人拒絕出 Court was entitled to proceed with 席刑罰聆訊，但沒有給予任何解 sentencing. (See para. 13.) 原訟法庭 釋或理由。（見第12、16–17 段） 2) There was a strong public interest 高院雜項案件2017年第585及 in ensuring that orders of the court 586號 4) 被告人違反該命令亦是嚴重的 事。資產的資料唯獨被告人自己 should not be flouted. Subject to mit- 原訟法庭法官陳美蘭 igating factors, if any, the starting and 知道，而這些資料關係到眾原告 primary penalty for contempt of court 2019年3月5日 人阻止被告人散盡資產的能力， for breaching an injunction order was 也與監督馬雷瓦禁制令的執行有 imprisonment normally measured in 關。眾原告人會由於被告人故 months (Asia Islamic Trade Finance 蔑視法庭 — 民事蔑視 — 違反資產 意不遵從該命令而蒙受不利的影 Fund v Drum Risk Management Ltd 凍結令中披露資產的命令 — 嚴重 響。（見第18段） [2015] EWHC 3748 (Comm), Bunge 的、故意的及持續的違反 — 沒有抵 SA v Huaya Maritime Corp of the Mar- 償蔑視罪的意圖 — 恰當的刑罰 5) 在涉案所有情況下，除了扣押令 shall Islands [2017] EWHC 90 (Comm), 和交付令之外，判處12個月即時 Law Lai Lan v Tamang Prem Chandr 眾原告人從被告人購入股份，代價是 監禁是合適的。（見第22段） (HCMP 2402/2017, [2018] HKEC 671) 286,815,887美元；眾原告人就購股 applied). (See paras. 14–15.) 一事產生的糾紛，在中國內地展開仲 聆訊 裁訴訟，向被告人申索損害賠償。香 這是一宗被告人被判刑的案件。被 3) D’s breach of the Order was deliber- 港法院發出馬雷瓦禁制令（Mareva 告人蔑視法庭，經聆訊後被判刑。 ate, intentional and continuing. She injunction）以協助仲裁，並命令被 案情已在判決書詳細列出。 had indicated no intention to com- 告人披露她的資產（「該命令」）。 ply with any order to be made by 眾原告人聲稱被告人沒有遵從該命 the Court, or to purge her contempt. 令，香港法院裁定被告人蔑視法庭罪 There was no demonstration of re- 名成立。被告人表示她不就眾原告人 morse, acceptance of responsibili- 建議的刑罰陳詞。儘管法院指示出席 CRIMINAL LAW ty, or offer of remedy. Further, D had 刑罰聆訊，但被告人缺席。 AND PROCEDURE refused to attend the Penalty Hear- ing without giving any explanation 裁決 – 判處被告人12個月監禁： HKSAR v Jatinder Singh or excuse. (See paras. 12, 16–17.) 1) 雖然被告人不服被裁定蔑視法庭 [2019] HKCA 113 4) D’s breach of the Order was also se- 罪名成立，提出上訴，但除非裁 rious. Information concerning as- 決被擱置，否則裁決一日未被擱 Court of Appeal sets was uniquely within her knowl- 置，法庭都有權繼續判刑。（見 edge and was pertinent to Ps’ ability 第13段） Criminal Appeal No 328 of 2017 to prevent dissipation of D’s assets and to police the Mareva injunction. 2) 法庭命令不該被公然蔑視，確保 McWalters and Zervos JJA and Ps would suffer prejudice due to D’s 這事不會發生是極之符合公眾 Joseph Yau J 利益的。違反禁制令而犯上蔑視 deliberate non-compliance with the 14 December 2018, 13 February 2019 Order. (See para. 18.) 法庭罪所適用的主要刑罰，一開 始是監禁，通常以月計算（引用 5) In all the circumstances, a sentence Asia Islamic Trade Finance Fund Criminal law and procedure — plea of 12 months’ immediate imprison- v Drum Risk Management Ltd — guilty plea — whether unequivocal ment was appropriate, as well as an [2015] EWHC 3748 (Comm) guilty plea rendered nullity by coun- order for committal and a warrant 、Bunge SA v Huaya Maritime sel’s incompetence or by alleged failure for committal. (See para. 22.) Corp of the Marshall Islands to accord discount in sentence [2017] EWHC 90 (Comm) Hearing 、Law Lai Lan v Tamang Prem Criminal sentencing — wounding with This was a hearing to sentence the de- Chandr (HCMP 2402/2017 intent — defendant slashed ex-lover’s fendant for contempt of court. The facts ，[2018] HKEC 671)）。（見 neck and abdomen using 11-cm long are set out in the judgment. 第14–15段） knife — potentially fatal injuries in-
www.hk-lawyer.org 71 • May 2019
flicted — offence premeditated — vic- 1) Section 82(1) of the Criminal Pro- those close to him or her (HKSAR v tim suffered residual psychological cedure Ordinance (Cap. 221), which Chan Chun Tat [2013] 6 HKC 225 ap- and physical symptoms — whether 10 provides that a person convicted of plied). (See para. 54.) years’ imprisonment manifestly exces- an offence on indictment may ap- sive or wrong in principle peal to the Court of Appeal, ap- 4) D’s sentence was neither manifest- plied equally to a conviction entered ly excessive nor wrong in princi- D pleaded guilty to wounding with intent. on the person’s own plea (HKSAR ple. Each case depended on its own D and V were ex-lovers. Some months v Shum Chiu [2011] 2 HKLRD 746, facts. Here, the Judge properly di- after V broke up with D, he cut across V’s HKSAR v Manjaiarraya Natthasiri rected herself on the relevant fac- throat with a 11-inch long knife, slashing (CACC 171/2015, [2015] HKEC 2685) tors and correctly concluded that multiple veins, neck muscles, the thyroid applied). (See para. 37.) D’s culpability was at the upper end gland and trachea and then downwards of the scale for sentencing. He had to her abdomen, before fleeing. V was 2) There was no merit in any of the used a dangerously sharp knife and hospitalised, intubated and underwent grounds of appeal against convic- inflicted potentially fatal injuries, in- emergency surgery. She was discharged tion. Inter alia, if D’s plea had not tending not only to cause serious after 17 days. D, an Indian national, was been voluntary, he had had ample bodily harm but to kill V. (See paras. represented throughout by counsel and opportunity to complain to the 59–60, 62–63.) aided by interpreters. On the first day of Court but did not do so. D was fully trial, D entered a plea of guilty and ad- aware of what was taking place at Applications for leave to appeal mitted the summary of facts. Sentenc- every stage of the hearings and the against conviction and sentence ing was twice adjourned for a victim im- Judge herself had made enquiry This were applications for leave to ap- pact report on V and, subsequently, a with him and confirmed his plea of peal against conviction and sentence psychological report on D. In the latter, guilty was entered voluntarily and imposed by Susana D’Almada Remedi- D denied the charge and asserted V had unequivocally. Further, D was or- os J (see [2017] HKEC 2429). The facts cut herself with his knife. However, on dered to file an affirmation detailing are set out in the judgment. the day of sentence, counsel confirmed his allegations of counsel incom- D’s plea of guilty on written instructions. petence but failed to do so. In any When asked by the Judge, D himself event, counsel had in fact mitigat- 刑事法及訴訟程序 maintained his guilty plea was entered ed fully and thoroughly on his be- voluntarily. The Judge noted the offence half (The Queen v Wong Ching Wah HKSAR v Jatinder Singh did not involve a domestic dispute, but [1976] HKLR 412, HKSAR v Wong Chi a premeditated and unprovoked venge- Yuk [2000] 3 HKLRD 125, HKSAR v [2019] HKCA 113 ance attack resulting from D’s unrequit- Shum Wan Foon (2014) 17 HKCFAR ed love for V; the assault inflicted on one 303, HKSAR v Nur Mei Lina (CACC 上訴法庭 of V’s most vulnerable areas was mer- 250/2017, [2018] HKEC 2398) ap- ciless in disregard of her life; V still suf- plied). (See paras.47–52.) 刑事上訴案件2017年第328號 fered post-traumatic stress, psycholog- ical distress and chronic impairment of Application for leave to appeal against 上訴法庭法官麥偉德 functioning; severe neck pain requir- sentence 上訴法庭法官薛偉成 ing painkillers every night; and anxie- 原訟法庭法官邱智立 ty about whether the pain would stop. 3) There were no sentencing guide- 2018年12月14日、2019年2月 The Judge adopted a starting point of 15 lines for offences of wounding with 13日 years and reduced it for plea to 10 years’ intent. Factors relevant to sentenc- imprisonment. D applied for leave to ap- ing included the extent to which the peal against conviction, arguing that: (a) assault was premeditated; the rea- 刑事法及訴訟程序 — 答辯 — 認罪 his lawyer forced him to plead guilty; (b) sons or motivation underlying the — 毫不含糊的認罪可會由於大律師 he did not receive any discount in sen- assault; the mental or emotional 不稱職或被告人指稱刑期不獲扣減 tence contrary to his lawyer’s advice; (c) state of the assailant at the time; 而無效 another lawyer who mitigated on his be- whether alcohol or drugs contribut- half acted against him; and (d) everyone ed to the assailant’s actions; wheth- 刑事罪判刑 — 蓄意傷人 — 被告人 lied to him. D also sought leave to ap- er the assailant acted alone or as 用11吋長刀砍前戀人的頸和腹 — 造 peal against sentence. part of a group; the type of weap- 成的傷勢可以致命 — 有預謀的罪行 ons employed; the level of force or — 受害人出現殘留的心理及生理症 Held, dismissing the applications, that: aggression and the persistence with 狀 — 10年監禁是否明顯過長或原則 which the assault was committed; 上出錯 Application for leave to appeal against the injuries to the victim and the ef- conviction fect of the assault on the victim and 被告人承認蓄意傷人罪。被告人和受
72 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • CASES IN BRIEF 案例撮要
不服判刑而提出的上訴許可申請
3) 蓄意傷人罪沒有適用的判刑指 引。與判刑相關的因素包括：襲 擊的預謀程度；襲擊的理由或背 後動機；襲擊者案發時的精神狀 態；襲擊者有否受酒精或藥物影 響；襲擊是個人或群體行為；所 用武器的性質；武力使用或侵犯 的程度及持續襲擊時間的長短； 受害人的傷勢及襲擊帶給受害人 及親人等的影響（引用HKSAR v Chan Chun Tat [2013] 6 HKC 225）。（見第54段）
4) 被告人的判刑不是明顯過重，也 沒有在原則上出錯。每宗案件 取決於案件本身的事實。在這宗 案，原審法官循相關因素的方向 害人曾經是戀人。受害人和被告人分 裁決 –駁回申請： 考慮，做法恰當，定論被告人罪 手數個月後，被告人用11吋長刀橫 責是判刑最重的那一種，也是正 砍受害人的喉嚨，割斷多條血管，並 不服定罪而提出的上訴許可申請 確的。他當時無視危險，用利刀 由上而下，砍傷受害人頸部肌肉、甲 施襲，造成的傷勢可以致命，不 狀腺及氣管、腹部；他之後逃跑。受 1) 《刑事訴訟程序條例》（第221 只是蓄意對受害人造成嚴重的身 害人被送到醫院，醫護人員為她插喉 章）第82(1)條規定，循公訴程 體傷害，而是想殺死她。（見第 及進行緊急手術。17日後她出院。 序被定罪的人，可向上訴法庭 59–60、62–63段） 被告人，印度籍人士，審訊期間一直 提出上訴；第82(1)條同樣適用 由大律師代表，並有傳譯員提供協 於自己認罪後被定罪的人（引 不服定罪和判刑而提出的上訴許可 助。審訊第一日，被告人作出認罪答 用HKSAR v Shum Chiu [2011] 申請 辯及承認案情撮要。因為要等待受害 2 HKLRD 746、HKSAR v 這是一宗申請上訴許可的案件。被 人的衝擊評核報告，及其後也要等待 Manjaiarraya Natthasiri (CACC 告人在原訟法庭李素蘭法官席前被 被告人的心理報告，法庭兩度押後判 171/2015，[2015] HKEC 定罪及判刑（見[2017] HKEC 2429 刑。被告人在心理報告中否認控罪， 2685)）。（見第37段） ），被告人不服，申請上訴許可。 堅稱是受害人用他的刀砍她自己。不 案情已在判決書詳細列出。 過在判刑那一天，大律師確定被告人 2) 針對定罪提出的上訴理由，無 維持認罪並書面給予指示。原審法 一不是缺乏充分理據的。除了 官問被告人一個問題，問他是否自 別的之外，假若被告人一直不 願維持認罪，被告人親自回答是自願 是自願認罪，他當時有很多機 的。原審法官留意到被告人的罪行與 會向法庭投訴，但他沒有這樣 CRIMINAL SENTENCING 家庭糾紛無關，只是一種有預謀及並 做。被告人完全知道每個聆訊 非源於挑釁的報復式襲擊，是被告人 階段發生什麼事，原審法官問 的愛不獲受害人接納而導致的；被告 過他是否自願認罪，他確定 HKSAR v Fok Ka Po Joe 人冷酷無情，不顧受害人的生死，攻 自己是自願認罪的，答案毫不 [2019] HKCA 134 擊她身體最脆弱的地方；受害人至今 含糊。此外，被告人被命令將 仍然出現創傷後壓力症狀、心理困擾 誓章送交存檔，在誓章詳述他 Court of Appeal 及長期功能受損，還有嚴重頸痛，每 有關大律師不稱職的指稱，但 晚需要服用止痛藥，又因為不知道痛 他沒有按照命令去做。不管怎 Criminal Appeal No 423 of 2015 楚可會消失而感到焦慮。原審法官採 樣，大律師事實上已經傾盡全 用15年為量刑起點，因為被告人認 力代他求情（引用The Queen v Macrae V-P, McWalters and Pang 罪，扣減至10年監禁。被告人不服 Wong Ching Wah [1976] HKLR JJA 定罪，申請上訴許可。他辯稱：(a) 412、HKSAR v Wong Chi Yuk 他的律師強迫他認罪；(b)他得不到 [2000] 3 HKLRD 125、HKSAR 7 August 2018, 16 January, 1 刑期扣減，但律師卻告知他，他是可 v Shum Wan Foon (2014) 17 February 2019 以得到的；(c)另一名代表他求情的 HKCFAR 303、HKSAR v Nur 律師，行事不利於他；及(d)人人都 Mei Lina (CACC 250/2017 Criminal sentencing — conspiracy to 向他撒謊。被告人亦針對判刑申請上 ，[2018] HKEC 2398)）。（ throw corrosive fluid with intent to 訴許可。 見第47–52段） burn — starting point — approach —
www.hk-lawyer.org 73 • May 2019
disparity removed on appeal — youth of offender who had involved a minor in the offence taken into account in his favour — starting point was point taken before aggravating and mitigat- ing factors
D1–3 were convicted after trial of con- spiracy to throw corrosive fluid with in- tent to burn. They were given leave to appeal against conviction, but their ap- peals were dismissed (see [2018] 2 HKLRD 1223). This judgment deals with sentence. D1–2 were each sentenced to 18 years’ imprisonment, while D3 was sentenced to 19 years’ imprisonment. Ds applied for leave to appeal against sen- tence, complaining of having been sen- tenced too severely. 3) As for D2, there was no distinction 刑事罪判刑 Held, granting leave to appeal, treating between his role and that of the co- the hearing as the appeal and dismiss- conspirator and accomplice whom HKSAR v Fok Ka Po Joe ing D1’s appeal against sentence, but the Deputy Judge indicated she allowing D2–3’s appeals against sen- would have sentenced to 17 years’ [2019] HKCA 134 tence, that: imprisonment if he had been con- victed after trial and had not coop- 上訴法庭 1) There was some confusion as to erated by giving evidence for the what the Deputy Judge meant by prosecution. Accordingly, D2’s sen- 刑事上訴案件2015年第423號 “starting point”. A starting point tence would be reduced from 18 was the point taken before aggra- years’ imprisonment to 17 years’ im- 上訴法庭副庭長麥機智 vating and mitigating factors. But prisonment. (See paras. 36–37.) 上訴法庭法官麥偉德 the Deputy Judge seemed to have 上訴法庭法官彭偉昌 factored aggravating factors into 4) The appropriate starting point for 2018年8月7日；2019年1月16 the starting points which she adopt- D3 was 16 years. His involving of a 日、2月1日 ed (HKSAR v Muhammad Akram person aged 15 in such an appalling (CACC 374/2012, [2014] HKEC 895) offence was an aggravating factor. applied). (See paras. 15–20.) The Court had given considerable 刑事罪判刑 — 意圖使人燒傷而串謀 thought to increasing the 16 years 淋潑腐蝕性液體 — 量刑起點 — 處 2) For D1, a starting point of 16 years by more than one year but had been 理方法 — 經上訴後，不一致之處被 was appropriate and should be in- dissuaded from that course by the 消除 — 涉案年輕罪犯招用未成年人 creased by 2 years for the significant fact that he himself was only 19. Ac- 犯案，法庭以有利於他的方式考慮 role which he played in the conspir- cordingly, his sentence was reduced 此事 — 量刑起點是考慮加刑和減低 acy and for the aggravating feature from 19 years to 17 years’ imprison- 因素之前的那個量刑點 of visiting this appalling crime upon ment. (See paras. 38–40.) his own company and colleague 經審訊後，第一至第三被告人被裁 who had done him no wrong what- Applications for leave to appeal 定意圖使人燒傷而串謀淋潑腐蝕性 soever. So, although the Court ap- against sentence 液體罪罪名成立。他們獲得針對定 proached the starting point and ul- These were applications for leave to appeal 罪提出上訴的許可，只是上訴被駁 timate sentence in a different way against sentence for conspiracy to throw 回（見[2018] 2 HKLRD 1223）。 from the Deputy Judge, it arrived corrosive fluid with intent to burn imposed 這次要處理的是眾被告人的判刑。 at the same sentence as the one by Deputy Judge Campbell-Moffat SC. The 第一及第二被告人各被判監禁18 which she imposed on D1 (R v Chan facts are set out in the judgment. 年，第三被告人被判監禁19年。眾 Chi Lun [1989] 1 HKC 70, HKSAR v 被告人投訴判刑過份嚴苛，針對判 Sin Wa Chiu [2012] 1 HKLRD 768, Editorial note: At paras.25–33, the Court 刑申請上訴許可。 HKSAR v Lau Ching Him [2017] 3 of Appeal gave guidance of a general na- HKC 410 considered). (See paras. ture on sentencing in cases of this type. 裁決 – 批給上訴許可，把上訴申請 34–35.) 的聆訊視為上訴聆訊；第一被告人
74 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • CASES IN BRIEF 案例撮要
針對判刑提出的上訴被駁回，第二 刑申請上訴許可。案情已在判決書 adjudicated as “not chargeable with 及第三被告人針對判刑提出的上訴 詳細列出。 any duty”. The Commissioner of Rat- 獲判得直： ing and Valuation valued the Prop- 編者按：在第25–33段，上訴法庭就 erty at $1.85 million. The Collector of 1) 暫委法官有點混淆「量刑起點」 這類案件的判刑作出一般指引。 Stamp Duty informed T that the DFA 的意思。量刑起點是考慮加刑 and the Assent operated as voluntary 和減刑因素之前的那個量刑點。 dispositions inter vivos; the transfer of 暫委法官卻似乎把加刑因素計算 the Property was in excess of the trans- 在她採納的量刑起點之內（引 ferees’ entitlement to the estate under 用HKSAR v Muhammad Akram intestacy; and the Assent was charge- (CACC 374/2012，[2014] TAXATION able with $16,650 ad valorem stamp HKEC 895)）。（見第15–20 duty as a conveyance on sale under 段） Wong Suet Foon Shirly v Collector of s. 27(1) of the Stamp Duty Ordinance Stamp Revenue (Cap. 117) (“SDO”); the vesting of the 2) 以16年作為第一被告人的量 Property by T as administratrix in her 刑起點是合適的，而因為他在 [2019] HKDC 268 and AL was not a transfer of residential 串謀行動中扮演重要角色， property between close relatives such 加上他在自己工作的公司向跟 District Court that it was chargeable at the lower 自己無仇無怨的同事作出恐怖 Scale 2 rates under s. 29AL of the 的罪行――這是加刑因素，應 Stamp Appeal No 5 of 2016 SDO, and so the higher Scale 1 rates 將刑期加長兩年。因此，雖然 applied. T appealed. The Commission- 上訴法庭用有別於暫委法官所 Judge Andrew Li in Chambers er then changed its stance, stating that 用的方式處理量刑起點和最終 stamp duty was chargeable on the As- 12 September 2018, 27 February 判刑，但判處第一被告人的刑 sent only. 期與暫委法官所判處的是一樣 2019 的長（考慮R v Chan Chi Lun Held, that: [1989] 1 HKC 70、HKSAR v Taxation — stamp duty — assessment Sin Wa Chiu [2012] 1 HKLRD — deed of family arrangement and as- 1) Ad valorem stamp duty was charge- 768、HKSAR v Lau Ching Him sent vesting property in taxpayer — able on the Assent, but not the DFA. [2017] 3 HKC 410）。（見第 whether voluntary disposition inter (See paras. 26, 50, 56.) 34–35段） vivos — whether chargeable with ad valorem stamp duty — applicable rate 2) First, the dealings between the 3) 至於第二被告人，他的角色與同 — Stamp Duty Ordinance (Cap. 117) ss. HA and X’s children had no bear- 謀者或從犯並無分別；暫委法 27(1), 29AL ing on the issues before the Court. 官表示，倘若同謀者或從犯不合 The HA had never restricted the 作，不為控方作供，其後經審訊 X, the owner of a Tenant Purchase number of assignees under the 被定罪，就會判處他監禁17年。 Scheme flat (the “Property”) assigned Tenant Purchase Scheme. What- 相應地，第二被告人的判刑會由 by the Housing Authority (“HA”), had ever misconception had led to Cs 18年監禁縮減至17年。（見第 five children including T. After X died renouncing their rights/claims to 36–37段） intestate, T was granted letters of ad- the Property was irrelevant to the ministration (the “Grant”). Purport- stamp duty imposed. (See para. 4) 以16年作為第三被告人的量刑 edly relying on the HA’s advice (which 28.) 起點是合適的。他招用15歲人 turned out to be erroneous) that “only 士加入這場恐怖罪行；這是一 2 [children] can become the succeed- 3) Second, T’s argument that no 個加刑因素。上訴法庭仔細考 ing owners of the Property”, X’s chil- beneficial interest in the Proper- 慮過在16年監禁期之上加刑多 dren agreed, by a Deed of Family Ar- ty had ever passed under the As- 於一年，但基於他那時只有19 rangement (“DFA”), that three of them sent so that no stamp duty for a 歲，因此打消了這個想法。因 (“Cs”) would abandon and/or renounce conveyance of immovable proper- 此，他被判處的監禁期由19年 their shares in the Property, leaving T ty under s. 27(1) of the SDO was 縮減至17年。（見第38–40 and AL as joint tenants thereof. Stamp chargeable was rejected. A writ- 段） duty of $16,650 was assessed on the ten assent was required to effect DFA and paid, subject to objection. the passing of a legal estate, even 不服判刑而提出的上訴許可申請 Pursuant and/or subject to the DFA, T where the personal representative 這是一宗申請上訴許可的案件。眾 as the administratrix under the Grant, was also the beneficiary (Wong 被告人因為意圖使人燒傷而串謀淋 executed an Assent vesting in and as- Mei Sin v Ng Wai Kin [2011] 4 潑腐蝕性液體，被暫委法官金貝理 signing the Property to her and AL as HKLRD 109 applied). (See paras. 資深大律師判處監禁。他們針對判 the only joint tenants. The Assent was 30–32, 46.)
www.hk-lawyer.org 75 • May 2019
FAMILY HOME TAX
4) X’s children had no beneficial in- tiles Industrials Co Ltd v Collector of 稅務 terests in her estate until it was Stamp Revenue [1976] AC 530, Tan administered. The Assent operat- Kay Thye v Commissioner of Stamp Wong Suet Foon Shirly v Collector of ed as an assignment transferring Duties [1991] 3 MLJ 150, So Kam Stamp Revenue the Property, and also assigned Shing & So Kam Wai v Collector of both the legal and beneficial inter- Stamp Revenue [2018] 2 HKLRD [2019] HKDC 268 ests therein to T and AL (GHR Co 1260 applied). (See paras. 42, 45, Ltd v Inland Revenue Commission- 48.) 區域法院 er [1943] 1 KB 303; Kemp v Commis- sioners of Inland Revenue [1905] 1 6) Section 29AL, which provides 印花稅評稅上訴案2016年第5號 KB 581 distinguished). (See paras. for a lower rate of ad valorem 33–37.) stamp duty, did not apply here. 區域法院法官李樹旭內庭聆訊 Cs never had any beneficial in- 2018年9月12日、2019年2月 5) The Assent was a conveyance terests in the Property capable 27日 which operated as a voluntary dis- of being transferred to T and AL. position inter vivos under s. 27(1), Neither was T the transferor. Ac- since it conferred a substantial cordingly, ad valorem stamp duty 稅務 — 稅花稅 — 評稅 — 家庭協議 benefit, ie the extra 60% of Cs’ on the Assent should be charged 契據及允許書將物業歸屬納稅人 — beneficial interests, on T and AL at Scale 1 of Head 1(1) in Sch. 1 to 是否生者之間的無償產權處置 — 是 in excess of their original entitle- the SDO, ie $16,550. (See paras. 否可予徵收從價印花稅 — 適用稅率 ment to 40% of the Property under 51–55.) —《印花稅條例》（第117章）第 intestacy law. This test was an ob- 27(1)及29AL條 jective one and the parties’ inten- Appeal tion was irrelevant (Baker v Com- This was an appeal by a taxpayer against X透過租者置其屋計劃從房屋委員會 missioner of Inland Revenue [1924] a notice of stamp duty assessment in re- （「房委會」）購入一個單位（「該 AC 270, Wigan Coal & Iron Co Ltd spect of a family arrangement and a 物業」），經房委會轉讓後，X成為 v Inland Revenue Commissioners deed of assent. The facts are set out in 該物業的業主。X有五名子女，T是 [1945] 1 All ER 392, Lap Shun Tex- the judgment. 她女兒。X去世之前沒有立遺囑，T
76 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • CASES IN BRIEF 案例撮要
律產業權的轉移，即使遺產代理 人也是受益人亦然（引用Wong Mei Sin v Ng Wai Kin [2011] 4 HKLRD 109）。（見第30–32 、46段）
4) X的遺產被處理之前，她的子女 不享有她遺產的實益權益。允許 書是轉讓契，作用是將該物業轉 讓，同時將該物業的法定權益和 實益權益轉讓給T和AL（有別於 GHR Co Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioner [1943] 1 KB 303 、Kemp v Commissioners of Inland Revenue [1905] 1 KB 581）。（見第33–37段）
5) 由於允許書賦予T和AL的實際利 益，即額外賦予T和AL該三名子 女享有的60%實益權益，超過 二人原本在無遺囑繼承法下在該 物業享有的40%權益，因此根據 第27(1)條，允許書是轉易契， 作用是作出生者之間的無償產權 處置。這是一種客觀的測試，與 雙方的意願無關（引用Baker v Commissioner of Inland Revenue [1924] AC 270、Wigan Coal & Iron Co Ltd v Inland Revenue 獲授予遺產管理書（「該授予」） 29AL條，親屬之間的轉讓才按照較 Commissioners [1945] 1 All 。X的子女獲房委會告知，「只有兩 低的第2標準稅率徵收從價印花稅； ER 392、Lap Shun Textiles 名[女子]可以繼承該物業，成為該物 因此，較高的第1標準稅率適用於該 Industrials Co Ltd v Collector of 業的業主」，據稱他們以房委會的意 物業的轉讓。T上訴。署長其後改變 Stamp Revenue [1976] AC 530 見為依據（結果該意見是錯的）， 立場，述明只是允許書才須予徵收印 、Tan Kay Thye v Commissioner 藉家庭協議契據（「該契據」）同意 花稅。 of Stamp Duties [1991] 3 三名子女（「該三名子女」）會棄置 MLJ 150、So Kam Shing & So 及∕或放棄在該物業的份額，由T和 裁決： Kam Wai v Collector of Stamp AL做該物業的聯權共有人。該契據 Revenue [2018] 2 HKLRD 1260 的印花稅評定為$16,650，如有人反 1) 須予徵收從價印花稅的是允許 ）。（見第42、45、48段） 對則作別論；印花稅已獲支付。根據 書，不是該契據。（見第26 該契據及∕或在該契據的規限下，T 、50、56段） 6) 第29AL條，訂明從價印花稅較 以該授予所指定的女遺產管理人的 低稅率的條文，在此並不適用。 身份，執行允許書，將該物業歸屬兩 2) 首先，房委會與X的子女之間的 該三名子女從來不在該物業有過 名唯一的聯權共有人，她和AL。允 交易，跟區域法院席前的爭議並 任何可以轉讓給T和AL的實益權 許書被判定為「不予徵稅」。差餉物 無關係。根據租者置其屋計劃， 益。T是轉讓人，但一樣沒有。 業估價署署長（「署長」）給該物業 房委會從來沒有限制受讓人的人 因此，允許書的從價印花稅應按 估價為$1,850,000。印花稅署署長 數。不論該三名子女是基於什麼 《條例》附表1第1(1)類第2標 通知T，該契據和允許書的作用是作 錯誤的觀念而放棄他們在該物業 準，予以徵稅，即徵收$16,550 出生者之間的無償產權處置；在死者 的權利∕申索，一概與徵收印花 。（見第51–55段） 無立遺囑的情況下，該物業給轉讓的 稅無關。（見第28段） 份額超過受讓人在遺產享有的權益； 上訴案 根據《印花稅條例》（第117章）（ 3) 其次，T爭辯說，根據允許書， 這是一宗上訴案。納稅人針對一份 「《條例》」）第27(1)條，允許書 該物業的實益權益從來沒有轉 就家庭安排和允許契據作出的印花 須作為售賣轉易契而予以徵收從價印 移過，因此不用根據《條例》第 稅評定通知書，提出上訴。案情已 花稅；T，作為女遺產管理人，將該 27(1)條的規定，就不動產的轉 在判決書詳細列出。 物業歸屬她自己和AL，這不是親屬 易契徵收印花稅；這個爭論點不 之間轉讓住宅物業，根據《條例》第 被接納。書面允許書必須執行法
www.hk-lawyer.org 77 • May 2019
PRACTICE SKILLS 實踐技能 Personal Branding for Lawyers: 6 Steps to Start on the Inside
By Thomson Reuters
Generally, the importance of personal • What professional or personal profiles. As the meeting concluded, branding is knowing who you are, experience do you have that others one person made a comment about what you stand for, your professional don’t have? something that was not work-related, strengths and what clients can expect • Do you approach your work in a but it captured the attention of another when they hire you. What is often different or more efficient manner? person and sparked a conversation overlooked, however, is the importance • What skill do you possess that could which would surely continue days or even of internal branding — ensuring that help another colleague? weeks later. In that moment, those two your colleagues know who you are and individuals made a connection with one what makes you unique. As law firms If you are having trouble answering these another and from there, the relationship spend an increasing amount of energy questions, or you want to verify what you can build. It’s that small talk that can into cross-selling efforts, becoming a believe to be true about yourself, ask really leave a lasting impression. well-known presence is an important the people who know you best: family, business development strategy. Here friends and colleagues. They will either STEP THREE: Get Involved — Law are a few ideas to think about: confirm what you know — or even better firms tend to have many committees — highlight your traits that are not dedicated to a variety of topics. Are you STEP ONE: Figure Out What Makes squarely on your radar but should be! interested in diversity? Pro bono work? You Stand Out — This one tends to be Hiring? Work-life balance issues? If the difficult for most people (few people STEP TWO: Get Out of Your Office and answer is yes, then put yourself out there actually enjoy talking about themselves) Say Hello — How many times have you and join the committee (and think about and it can take time, but it is a good decided to stay put in your office for a whether there may be a leadership exercise that will help you to crystallise conference call when other colleagues opportunity for you in the future). While your message. Here are some questions have assembled in a conference room? these committees don’t always focus on you can ask yourself to get started: So often the important, relationship- legal issues per se, the topics are ones building conversations happen when the about which people are passionate. Yet • What can you do or offer that few final good-byes are said on a conference another way to forge those relationships! others can do? call. Imagine presenting at a meeting • What don’t your colleagues or with new partners to discuss different STEP FOUR: Update Your Website clients know about you? ways partners can raise their individual Biography — Biographies are the
78 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • PRACTICE SKILLS 實踐技能
most-read content on a law firm’s of the person(s) with whom you will be other matters, including firm accolades, website. It is important to keep your meeting? The same goes for meetings events, etc. As a busy lawyer, this can biography updated on a regular basis. A with your colleagues. Perhaps there is be hard to do, but just like exercise, you good rule of thumb is to look at it every something you will pick up from their must make time for it. six months and think about what can be biography that is a conversation starter added or edited. If you have a significant (such as, you attended the same college When lawyers ask about the different development to report in advance of that or law school, or you’ve worked on similar marketing and business activities six-month checkpoint, then update your matters or ones that are of interest to available to them (aka the tools in the biography more frequently. Biographies you). Think of it this way — prior to a toolbox), the advice to them is to start provide an excellent window into who meeting, you prepare, and that includes small, pick what they enjoy most and you are as a professional and where your understanding who the meeting partic- build from there. When it comes to talent lies. ipants are and how to maximize the time building your internal profile, there are spent together. not really any choices. You either do it or STEP FIVE: Read Others’ Biographies you don’t. It’s all up to you! — If “other people” are reading your STEP SIX: Be Informed — Make sure to biography, then you should be one of get to know your firm and its practices Editorial note: A version of this piece those “other people” and read their (even the ones that are not your own). was published by the Thomson Reuters biographies. Would you ever go to a job Many firms use their intranets as hubs Legal Executive Institute interview without reading the biography for information about cases, deals and (www.legalexecutiveinstitute.com)
www.hk-lawyer.org 79 • May 2019 律師的個人品牌：從 內部做起的六個步驟
文：湯森路透
一般而言，個人品牌的重要性在於 讓人知道你是誰、你的主張、你的 專業優勢，以及客戶聘用你時可作 何期望。相反，內部品牌經常被忽 略：確保同事知道你是誰和你的獨 特之處。隨著律師行越來越投入交 叉銷售工作，知名度是重要的業務 發展戰略。以下幾點值得考慮：
第一步：甚麼令你脫穎而出 - 這對大 多數人來說往往很難(很少人喜歡談 論自己)，而且需要時間，但有助你 Judicial Graphology 明確信息。以下是你可以問自己的 一些問題： or • 你可以做甚麼或提供甚麼而很少 人能做到？ Document Authentication • 同事或客戶不認識你的哪方面？ • 你有哪些別人沒有的專業或個人 經歷？ • 你是否以不同或更有效的方式處 第三步：投入參與 - 律師行往往有許 官的簡介就去面試嗎？與同事會面 理工作？ 多委員會，專注各種議題。你對多 亦然。也許你會從他們的簡介找到 • 你有甚麼技能可以幫助另一位同 元化感興趣嗎？義務工作？聘用？ 話題(例如你們讀同一所大學或法律 事？ 工作與生活平衡？如果答案是肯定 學院，或者你們曾經從事類似的工 Analytical Graphology 的，那就加入這些委員會(並考慮將 作或你感興趣的事情)。這樣想：會 如果你在回答這些問題時遇到困 來是否可能擔任領導角色)。雖然這 議前你要準備，包括了解與會者是 for 難，或者想驗證真實情況，請詢問 些委員會並一定與法律問題有關， 誰及如何最有效運用會議時間。 最了解你的人：家人、朋友和同 但往往是人們熱衷的議題，是建立 Character Analysis 事。他們或許會確認你的想法，甚 關係的另一種方式！ 第六步：掌握情況 - 確保了解你的 至指出你自己也不為意的特徵！ 律師行和其業務(包括不屬於你的業 第四步：更新網站個人簡介 - 個人簡 務)。許多律師行依賴內部網絡為案 第二步：離開辦公室打聲招呼 -當 介是律師行網站上閱讀率最高的內 件、交易和其他事項提供資料。律 其他同事聚集在會議室時，你有多 容。定期更新個人簡介很重要。每 師工作繁忙，可能很難做，但就像 少次決定留在辦公室開電話會議？ 六個月查看一次，考慮內容有甚麼 運動一樣，你必須騰出時間。 建立重要關係的對話，通常在電話 可添加或編輯。如果在六個月前有 會議最後告別時發生。試想象與新 重要的發展要報告，那就請更頻密 律師營銷和商業活動(工具箱中的工 合夥人開會討論提升個人形象。會 地更新個人簡介。個人簡介是個很 具)建議是從小做起，選擇最喜歡 www.handwritinganalysis.com.hk 議結束時，有人說了與工作無關的 好的窗口，讓人了解你的專業及的 的東西，從那裡開始。建立內部形 事，引起了另一個人的注意，兩人 才能。 象是必需的，要不要做，全取決於 聊了起來，聊天肯定會持續數天甚 你！ 至數週。在那一刻，這兩個人建立 第五步：閱讀其他人的簡介 - 如果其 了聯繫，關係因而建立起來。閒聊 他人閱讀你的簡介，那麼你也應該 編者按：本文曾於湯森路透法律行政學院 才會留下持久的印象。 閱讀他們的簡介。你會未讀過面試 刊載(www.legalexecutiveinstitute.com)。
80 www.hk-lawyer.org Judicial Graphology or Document Authentication
Analytical Graphology for Character Analysis
www.handwritinganalysis.com.hk • May 2019
PROFESSIONAL MOVES 會員動向 Newly-Admitted Members 新會員
CHAN KIU CHING CHOI MAGGIE HOI TSAO CHIAO YIN 陳喬湞 NI EVELYN ASHURST HONG 蔡凱妮 曹喬茵 KONG 亞司特律師事務所
CHAN NIM TUNG CHOW YING KIU WONG CHI WAI CRYSTAL 周影翹 黃揸維 陳念彤 LINKLATERS TC & CO. LUK & PARTNERS 年利達律師事務所 崔曾律師事務所 陸繼鏘律師事務所
CHAN WAI KA KANG HUI MIN WONG HOK PAN 陳慧嘉 MICHELLE 黃學斌 FANGDA PARTNERS 江慧敏 MA TANG & CO. 方達律師事務所 FRESHFIELDS 馬鄧律師行 BRUCKHAUS DERINGER 富而德律師事務所
CHEW CHUNG WAH LEUNG KAM HOI YAN XUEFEI 周頌華 ANTHONY 閻雪霏 LINKLATERS 梁淦凱 HALDANES 年利達律師事務所 LCH LAWYERS LLP 何敦律師行 呂鄭洪律師行有限 法律責任合夥
CHING HIU YAN TO PAK HO YEUNG YEE WAN 程曉恩 杜栢豪 楊漪芸 LINKLATERS MAYER BROWN 年利達律師事務所 孖士打律師行
82 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • PROFESSIONAL MOVES 會員動向
CHAN CHUK KWAN SUSANA LAM MICHAELA CHI-YAN MOK YEE WA 陳竹筠 林芷欣 莫綺華 C/O WALKERS (HONG KONG) CHAN & CO., VICTOR CHENG HEI CHUNG BERNARD 陳仲然律師行 清晞誦 LAU NGA SZE 劉雅斯 SIM CHI PING CHEUNG KAI ON 沈治平 張啟安 LEE ALAN YIN-CHEONG WOO & CO., P.C. L&C LEGAL LLP 李衍錩 胡百全律師事務所 羅陳律師事務所有限法律責任合夥 SWARTZ, BINNERSLEY & ASSOCIATES SIU MAN KING DENG XIAONING LEE HA YIN 蕭文琼 鄧小宁 李夏燕 LEE Y.C., PANG & KWOK, SOLICITORS LINKLATERS DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 李宇祥，彭錦輝，郭威，霍健琳律師事 年利達律師事務所 務所 LI XIAOFENG FU CHI HO 李晓峰 TSE ANGUS KWAN CHAK 傅志豪 MA TANG & CO. 謝君澤 馬鄧律師行 FUNG YAT TIN VENANZI CAMILLA 馮逸天 LIN CHUNG FAI SIMON FITZGERALD LAWYERS BAKER & MCKENZIE 連宗輝 德龍律師事務所 貝克‧麥堅時律師事務所 WATSON FARLEY & WILLIAMS LLP 華盛國際律師事務所(有限法律責任合 ZHANG CHENGLIANG LAM HON HIN IAN 夥) 章丞亮 林瀚軒 C/O HERBERT SMITH FREEHILLS HO TSE WAI & PARTNERS 何謝韋律師事務所
Partnerships and Firms 合夥人及律師行變動
Changes received as from 1 March 2019 取自2019年3月1日起香港律師會所提供之最新資料
• CHAN HUNG YUEN ROBERT • CHAN PUN HON commenced practice as a partner of Robert Chan & Co., LLP as joined Vincent Mak & Co. as a consultant as from 15/03/2019. from 01/04/2019 and joined So, Lung & Associates as a partner Mr. Chan ceased to be a partner of Chan & Yeung Lawyers LLP on the same day. as from 27/03/2019 and ceased to be a consultant of Vincent 陳鴻遠 Mak & Co. on the same day. 自2019年4月1日成為新開業Robert Chan & Co., LLP合夥 陳本漢 人，並於同日加入蘇龍律師事務所為合夥人。 自2019年3月15日加入麥宜全律師行為顧問。陳律師於 2019年3月27日不再出任陳與楊律師行(有限法律責任合 • CHAN JO YING BONNIE 夥)合夥人及麥宜全律師行顧問二職。 ceased to be a partner of Chan and Cheng as from 01/04/2019 and remains as a consultant of the firm. • CHAN YIU CHONG CHRISTOPHER 陳祖楹 ceased to be a partner of Chan and Cheng as from 01/04/2019 自2019年4月1日不再出任陳耀莊鄭樹深律師行合夥人一 and remains as a consultant of the firm. 職，而轉任為該行顧問。 陳耀莊 自2019年4月1日不再出任陳耀莊鄭樹深律師行合夥人一 • CHAN KAM CHING JOHN BARRY 職，而轉任為該行顧問。 ceased to be the sole practitioner of John Chan & Co Solicitors as from 05/04/2019 and the firm closed on the same day. • CHENG PETER GUANG 陳鑑清 ceased to be a partner of Zhong Lun Law Firm as from 自2019年4月5日不再出任陳鑑清律師行獨資經營者一職， 09/04/2019. 而該行亦於同日結業。 程廣 自2019年4月9日不再出任中倫律師事務所合夥人一職。
www.hk-lawyer.org 83 • May 2019
• CHENG BIN • LEE KAM HOO WILLIAM ceased to be a partner of Hauzen LLP as from 01/04/2019. ceased to be a partner of F. Zimmern & Co. as from 01/04/2019. 程斌 李金壕 自2019年4月1日不再出任浩宸律師行有限法律責任合夥合 自2019年4月1日不再出任施文律師行合夥人一職。 夥人一職。 • LEE WING CHEUNG VIRGINIA • CHENG KAI CHEONG ceased to be a partner of V. Lee & Co., Solicitors as from became a partner of So, Lung & Associates as from 01/04/2019. 01/04/2019 and the firm closed on the same day. Ms. Lee 鄭啟昌 remains as a consultant of Cheung & Yeung, Solicitors. 自2019年4月1日成為蘇龍律師事務所合夥人。 李穎彰 自2019年4月1日不再出任李穎彰律師事務所合夥人一職， • CHUNG KAM WING CALVIN 而該行亦於同日結業。李律師仍繼續擔任張國鈞楊煒凱律 ceased to be a partner of Ong & Chung as from 01/04/2019 and 師事務所顧問一職。 remains as a consultant of the firm. 鍾金榮 • LEONG PUI CHUN GLADYS 自2019年4月1日不再出任王東昇, 鍾金榮律師事務所合夥 ceased to be a partner of Vincent T.K. Cheung, Yap & Co. as from 人一職，而轉任為該行顧問。 01/04/2019 and remains as a consultant of the firm. 梁佩珍 • FUNG LAI YIN FREDERICK 自2019年4月1日不再出任張葉司徒陳律師事務所合夥人一 ceased to be a partner of LCP as from 01/04/2019 and remains 職，而轉任為該行顧問。 as a consultant of the firm. 馮禮賢 • LEUNG HOI YIN 自2019年4月1日不再出任梁陳彭律師行合夥人一職，而轉 became a partner of Robin Bridge & John Liu as from 任為該行顧問。 01/04/2019. 梁凱然 • KAM HOU YEE MADELINE 自2019年4月1日成為喬立本廖依敏律師行合夥人。 became a partner of Gary Mak, Dennis Wong & Chang as from 01/04/2019. • LI KWOK YING 甘灝儀 ceased to be a partner of Yap & Lam, Solicitors as from 自2019年4月1日成為麥黃張律師行合夥人。 01/04/2019. 李國英 • KONG BONNIE WAI YU 自2019年4月1日不再出任葉天養、葉欣穎、林健雄律師行 became a partner of Paul Hastings as from 26/03/2019. 合夥人一職。 江慧茹 自2019年3月26日成為普衡律師事務所合夥人。 • LUI CHI HO ceased to be a partner of ONC Lawyers as from 20/03/2019 and • LAM SAN KEUNG joined Ince & Co. as a partner on the same day. joined F. Zimmern & Co. as a partner as from 01/04/2019 and 呂志豪 remains as a partner of Lam, Lee & Lai and Ambrose Lam & Co. 自2019年3月20日不再出任柯伍陳律師事務所合夥人一 林新強 職，並於同日加入英士律師行為合夥人。 自2019年4月1日加入施文律師行為合夥人。林律師仍繼續 擔任林李黎律師事務所及林新強律師事務所合夥人二職。 • LUNG SIU WING commenced practice as a partner of Robert Chan & Co., LLP as • LAM YAN FONG FLORA from 01/04/2019. ceased to be a partner of Y.F. Lam & Co. as from 01/04/2019 龍紹榮 and remains as a consultant of the firm. 自2019年4月1日成為新開業Robert Chan & Co., LLP合夥人。 林欣芳 自2019年4月1日不再出任林欣芳律師事務所合夥人一職， • MA LAP YAN 而轉任為該行顧問。 joined F. Zimmern & Co. as a partner as from 01/04/2019 and remains as a partner of Ambrose Lam & Co. • LAU TSZ HO 馬立恩 ceased to be a partner of Zhong Lun Law Firm as from 自2019年4月1日加入施文律師行為合夥人，仍繼續擔任林 01/04/2019. 新強律師事務所合夥人一職。 劉子浩 自2019年4月1日不再出任中倫律師事務所合夥人一職。 • MAK YEE CHUEN VINCENT joined Chan & Yeung Lawyers LLP as a partner as from 15/03/2019.
84 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • PROFESSIONAL MOVES 會員動向
麥宜全 • WANG PENG 自2019年3月15日加入陳與楊律師行(有限法律責任合夥) became a partner of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom as 為合夥人。 from 01/04/2019. 王鵬 • MURRAY DAVID KEITH 自2019年4月1日成為世達國際律師事務所合夥人。 joined SF Lawyers as a partner as from 01/04/2019. MURRAY DAVID KEITH • WANG ZHENYA 自2019年4月1日加入符莎莉律師事務所為合夥人。 became a partner of Paul Hastings as from 04/04/2019. 王震亞 • NG WENCY 自2019年4月4日成為普衡律師事務所合夥人。 joined Christine Tsang and Company, Solicitors as a partner as from 01/04/2019. • WONG WAI CHING IRIS 吳詠詩 ceased to be a partner of V. Lee & Co., Solicitors as from 自2019年4月1日加入曾少英律師事務所為合夥人。 01/04/2019 and the firm closed on the same day. Ms. Wong joined Cheung & Yeung, Solicitors as a partner as from • NGAN ON TAK 01/04/2019. ceased to be a partner of F. Zimmern & Co. as from 01/04/2019 黃蔚晴 and remains as a consultant of the firm. 自2019年4月1日不再出任李穎彰律師事務所合夥人一職， 顏安德 而該行亦於同日結業。黃律師於2019年4月1日加入張國鈞 自2019年4月1日不再出任施文律師行合夥人一職，而轉任 楊煒凱律師事務所為合夥人。 為該行顧問。 • WOO RODERICK BUN • OOI ZHAO RONG became a partner of F. Zimmern & Co. as from 01/04/2019. became a partner of Hauzen LLP as from 31/03/2019. 吳斌 黃昭荣 自2019年4月1日成為施文律師行合夥人。 自2019年3月31日成為浩宸律師行有限法律責任合夥合夥 人。 • WU SHENG ceased to be a partner of DLA Piper Hong Kong as from 21/03/2019 • SO KWOK YUE and joined Mayer Brown as a partner as from 01/04/2019. became a partner of Wilkinson & Grist as from 01/04/2019. 吳胜 蘇珏璵 自2019年3月21日不再出任歐華律師事務所合夥人一職， 自2019年4月1日成為高露雲律師行合夥人。 並於2019年4月1日加入孖士打律師行為合夥人。
• SUM BRYAN CHE-KAN • YE YU RONG became a partner of Robin Bridge & John Liu as from ceased to be a partner of Miao & Co. as from 01/04/2019. 01/04/2019. 叶宇嶸 沈祐鋒 自2019年4月1日不再出任繆氏律師事務所合夥人一職。 自2019年4月1日成為喬立本廖依敏律師行合夥人。 • YEUNG WING KUEN WILLIAM • TONG MEI ceased to be a partner of Chan & Yeung Lawyers LLP as from joined Chan & Yeung Lawyers LLP as a partner as from 15/03/2019. 27/03/2019. 楊穎權 湯薇 自2019年3月15日不再出任陳與楊律師行(有限法律責任合 自2019年3月27日加入陳與楊律師行(有限法律責任合夥) 夥)合夥人一職。 為合夥人。 • YUNG CHUN WAN • TSO HON SAI BOSCO became a partner of Y.F. Lam & Co. as from 01/04/2019. ceased to be a partner of Tso Au Yim & Yeung as from 翁震寰 01/04/2019 and remains as a consultant of the firm. 自2019年4月1日成為林欣芳律師事務所合夥人。 曹漢璽 自2019年4月1日不再出任曹歐嚴楊律師行合夥人一職，而 • YUNG KING YU BONNIE 轉任為該行顧問。 ceased to be a partner of Paul Hastings as from 29/03/2019 and joined LC Lawyers LLP as a partner as from 01/04/2019. • TSUN KOK CHUNG RICHARD 容璟瑜 became a partner of Fred Kan & Co. as from 29/03/2019. 自2019年3月29日不再出任普衡律師事務所合夥人一職， 秦覺忠 並於2019年4月1日加入林朱律師事務所有限法律責任合夥 自2019年3月29日成為簡家驄律師行合夥人。 為合夥人。
www.hk-lawyer.org 85 • May 2019
Balancing Between Work and on the Board Errol Bong is the APAC Head of Legal & Compliance at Liquidnet and believes that progressive organisations understand the benefits of their employees having a healthy work-life balance
By Thomson Reuters
rrol Bong certainly knows the meaning of hard work and he has pushed hard to get qualified as a practising lawyer in Hong EKong, New South Wales, England & Wales, New York and Washington State. It was particularly taxing studying the New York Bar while working full time as a director in the General Counsel division at Credit Suisse. However, he explains that it is extremely important to manage individual work-life balance. He is currently Head of Legal & Compliance at Liquidnet, a leading alternative liquidity provider and brokerage house and after working at magic circle law firms and top tier investment banks, he can see the benefits a healthy work-life balance provided to the organisation and its employees.
Liquidnet provides a weekly on-site bootcamp to help busy employees stretch out and get their cardio exercise and actively encourages their employees to keep a healthy lifestyle with fresh fruit and vegetables available every morning. Further, they encourage their employees to keep training and improving on their favourite sports. For Errol, that has been wakeboarding, wakesurfing and scuba diving. “Hong Kong is an island; why not make the most of it?” says Errol. “We are blessed in Hong Kong, where you can go from Central to the beaches on the southside of Hong Kong in less than an hour. I have worked in London and other financial centres and there was no chance of being able to do that.”
86 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • LAWYERS AT LEISURE 律師閒情
While wakeboarding is a familiar sight key. However, on a more serious note, I a strong and robust hull, fuel efficient on junk trips, wakesurfing is still a was teaching friends on weekends and engine and of course generates a great relatively new sport. “I saw a lot of I decided to do it in a more organised wakesurfing wave” Errol says. “We are ocean surfers in Big Wave Bay and manner and that’s how it all started. I’ve partnering with a great boat builder other locations in Hong Kong hoping really enjoyed it since running the school in California to develop one of the first to catch a nice surf wave but thanks to has allowed me to meet a wide range boats with a new German engineered Hong Kong’s protected waters, mother of people that I would have never met turbo diesel engine that has more nature rarely obliged. Wakeboarders in otherwise. However, safety has always torque, lower maintenance and greater America were looking to develop a sport been important to me. I am a certified fuel efficiency than a regular petrol that was more accessible to a wider PADI scuba diving instructor and can engine. This boat will also have a unique range of people that had different levels certify rescue divers. I’ve been trained in resin infused hull which uses a technique of fitness compared to wakeboarding. marine rescue and CPR and I find that’s used by the aerospace industry; it creates Wakeboarding is a physically taxing important if you are bringing guests on a more robust hull that is better able to sport and is a good sport for a younger your boat. You want to be trained to help cope with the tough marine conditions in person. However, wakesurfing can be them in a worst-case scenario and my Hong Kong. The cost of these specialised enjoyed by everyone regardless of their scuba instructor training allows me to boats has risen dramatically as the age or fitness level. We found that this do that” amount of technology has increased but sport was perfect for Hong Kong where we are still focused on designing boats you can surf an endless wave generated Nevertheless, it has not always been easy. that are still affordable to the average by your own boat so we decided to help Errol explains that this sport requires very lawyer and his family. We are focusing on promote this sport in Hong Kong” specialised boats which can displace a boats that are easy to use and maintain: large amount of water in order to create a these boats can be driven by anyone that He enjoyed wakesurfing so much that surfable wave. It was very difficult to find can drive a car. Finally, a boat needs to he set up his own wakesurfing school a quality boat that was still affordable. displace a large amount of water in known as Wakesurfection and the Hong Moreover, most boats of this class were order to create a great surfable wave; Kong Wakesurf School since 2010 and is built for use in calm freshwater lakes in most boats use ballast bags which draw still in operation today. When asked how the US and not designed to handle the seawater to create that displacement. he managed to do this while still working tough marine conditions in Hong Kong. However, these bags take up a lot of as a lawyer, he laughed and said “Good “I have since moved into boat design room on boats and usually take some to time management and prioritisation is focusing on developing a boat that has fill as they use electrical pumps. We are
www.hk-lawyer.org 87 • May 2019
working on a boat that will use under new people and get into the area of boat and I think my employers recognise floor ballast tanks saving lots of space. design and manufacture which I never that with the increased productivity that Further, they will be gravity filled by would have moved into as an everyday get from myself and my team. It has opening large valves below the waterline lawyer. As lawyers we are usually at our been rewarding coaching people how which will allow these ballast tanks to be desks and the only part of our body that to wakeboard, wakesurf or scuba dive filled and emptied much more quickly gets any exercise is our brain. It's great to particularly where some students have than electrical pumps. be outside wakeboarding, wakesurfing been afraid of water. It’s great when they or designing and testing a new prototype have a big smile on their face after they I have really enjoyed sports: not only has wakesurfing boat. When I get back to get up on their wakesurf or after their it kept me fit, it has allowed me to meet work on Monday, my mind is refreshed first trip scuba diving”. 船上的工作與生活平衡
Errol Bong是Liquidnet亞太區法律與合規主管，他相信與時俱進的機構明白僱員工 作與生活平衡的好處
文：湯森路透
Errol Bong明白努力工作的意義， 他努力取得香港、新南威爾士、英 格蘭和威爾斯、紐約和華盛頓州的 執業律師資格。考取紐約律師資 格時尤其艱辛，因為期間他同時全 職擔任瑞士信貸集團法律顧問部門 主管。但是，他認為管理個人的 工作與生活平衡極為重要。他目 前擔任Liquidnet的法律與合規部主 管，Liquidnet是領先的替代流動量 提供者和經紀公司，在律師行和頂 級投資銀行工作過後，他看到為 工作與生活平衡對機構和僱員的好 處。
Liquidnet每週舉辦一次訓練，幫助 忙碌的員工伸展筋骨，進行有氧運 動，並積極鼓勵員工每天早上享用 新鮮水果蔬菜，保持健康的生活方 式。此外，他們鼓勵員工參與和精 進喜歡的運動。對Errol來說，是滑 水、無繩滑水和水肺潛水。他說： 「香港是個島，為何不充分利用 呢？我們在香港很幸運，一個小時 內就可從中環到港島南部的海灘。 我曾在倫敦和其他金融中心工作， 根本沒可能這樣做。」
滑水是遊船河常見的活動，無繩滑 水則是相對較新的運動。「我在大 浪灣和香港其他地方看到很多衝浪
88 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • LAWYERS AT LEISURE 律師閒情
者希望捕捉海浪，但香港水域有天 的水肺潛水教練訓練讓我可以這樣 這些船隻。最後，船隻需要大量排 然屏障保護，很少有大浪。美國的 做。」 水才能產生可沖浪波，多數船隻使 滑水者開發了一種運動，比滑水更 用壓載袋來製造浪波，但壓載袋佔 適合體能水平不同的人。滑水對體 然而，事情不總是那麼簡 去船隻大量空間，而且電動泵氣 能要求高，適合年青人。而無繩滑 單。Errol解釋，這項運動需要排 需要一些空時間。我們正研究把壓 水則適合任何年齡或體能。我們發 水量大的專業船隻，以產生可以浪 載箱放在船板下，以節省空間。此 現這項運動非常適合香港，你可 波。價錢相宜的優質船隻不易找。 外，在水線以下大型閥門會打開來 以用自己的船產生的無盡浪潮來滑 此外，這個級別的船隻大多數為美 進行重力填充，充氣和放氣過程較 水，所以我們決定在香港推廣這項 國等地的平靜淡水湖而設計，難以 電動泵氣快。」 運動。」 應付香港嚴峻的海洋環境。Errol 說：「後來我開始設計船隻，專 「我熱愛運動。運動不僅讓我保持 他熱愛無繩滑水，甚至於2010 注開發船體強大而堅固、燃油效率 健康，還讓我結識新朋友，接觸船 年起成立了無繩滑水學校 高、能產生大浪的船。我們正與 舶設計和製造，這是當律師的我從 Wakesurfection。被問到如何兩邊兼 加州一間出色的造船廠合作，開發 未想過接觸的領域。作為律師，我 顧時，他笑說：「時間管理和優先 首批配備德國製造柴油發動機的船 們通常坐在辦公桌前，身體唯一運 排序是關鍵。我在週末教朋友，決 隻，與普通汽油發動機相比，扭矩 動的部分是我們的大腦。能夠走出 定以更有條理的方式做這件事。我 更大、保養更易、燃油效率更高。 去玩滑水、無繩滑水或設計和測試 很喜歡這份工作，因為經營學校讓 這艘船的船體注入獨特的樹脂，採 新的滑水船，感覺棒極了，週一回 我結識到了許多本來沒有機會認識 用航天工業技術，船體更堅固，能 到工作崗位時精神爽利，僱主也意 的人。對我來說，安全是第一位。 更好地應對香港嚴峻的海洋環境。 識到我和團隊的工作效率提高。教 我是認可的PADI潛水教練，可以 使用的技術數量增加，專用船的成 人滑水、無繩滑水或水肺潛水很有 為救援潛水員提供認證。我接受過 本亦急劇上升，但我們仍然打算設 滿足感，特別是有些學生一開始怕 海上救援和心肺復蘇術訓練，把客 計普通律師和家人負擔得起的船 水。看到他們第一次滑水或潛水後 人帶到船上，這些訓練很重要，以 隻。我們想製造易於使用和保養的 臉上露出燦爛的笑容時，感覺真的 便在最糟糕的情況下幫助他們，我 船隻：任何懂開車的人都可以駕駛 很棒。」
www.hk-lawyer.org 89 • May 2019
CAMPUS VOICES 法學院新聞
Professor Zhao Yun appointed the inaugural Henry Cheng Professor in International Law
HKU held its twelfth Inauguration of Endowed Professorships on March 20 for nine new Endowed Professorships which are created to provide perpetual support to areas of academic excellence. Professor Zhao Yun of the Faculty was appointed the inaugural Henry Cheng Professor in International Law. The focus of Professor Zhao’s research is on space commercialisation and privatisation. He has completed a project on commercialising the International Space Station and is working on a multilateral regime for space resource mining and space sustainability. He is also researching on dispute resolution, in particular online dispute resolution. Believing Hong Kong is best placed to be Asia-Pacific’s international legal and dispute resolution centre, Dr Henry Cheng hopes this Professorship would contribute to the maintenance of the rule of law and to Hong Kong’s place in the global legal environment. The Faculty congratulates Professor Zhao Yun (left) and Dr the Honourable Henry Cheng Kar-Shun at the Professor Zhao and is grateful to Dr Cheng for his support to inauguration. legal education and to the Faculty. 趙雲教授(左)與鄭家純博士
趙雲教授就任鄭家純基金教授(國際法)
香港大學第十二屆「明德教授席」就職典禮於3月20日舉行，本年新增九席「明德教授席」，支持不同領域的教研工 作，其中趙雲教授就職成為首任鄭家純基金教授(國際法)。趙教授的研究包括如何將太空產業商業化和私有化，他剛 完成一項將國際太空站商業化的計劃，並正著手另一個以開採太空資源及持續發展為重心的多邊體制。趙教授另一研 究重點是爭議解決，特別是網上爭議解決。鄭家純博士認為香港有潛力成為亞太區國際法及調解仲裁中心，盼望此教 授席能鞏固學院在國際法研究的地位，推動香港成為區內的調解仲裁中心。學院恭賀趙教授、並感謝鄭博士對法律教 育和學院的大力支持。
90 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • CAMPUS VOICES 法學院新聞
HKU Law at 50 Distinguished Lecture 五十周年傑出講座-台 Series: The Modernization of the 灣司法之現代化
Judiciary in Taiwan 中國傳統中沒有現代的司法權觀念，司 法為統治者的工具。民國初期以來，多 The Faculty welcomes Professor Weng Yueh-sheng, Cheng Chan Lan Yue 個世代的法律人致力於建立健全獨立的 Distinguished Visiting Fellow and Former Chief Justice of Taiwan at the 司法權。雖然1946年的《中華民國憲 public lecture “The Modernization of the Judiciary in Taiwan” on March 法》建立了憲政體制下的司法機構，但 26. Traditionally, there has been no modern concept of judicial power in 直到1990年代，台灣才進入正常憲政狀 China and Judiciary was merely a tool of the rulers. Since the Republic of 態，司法改革取得成果，審判獨立與司 China was founded, generations of members of the legal community had 法品質逐漸受國際社會肯定。3月26日， attempted to develop a healthy and independent judiciary. Since the 1990s, 香港大學法律學院鄭陳蘭如基金傑出訪 constitutionalism has been practised in Taiwan, and judicial reform has 問學人、台灣司法院前院長，翁岳生教 achieved a considerable degree of success. In his lecture, Professor Weng 授主講公開講座「台灣司法之現代化」 reviewed the historical development of the judiciary in Taiwan, and explored ，回溯司法權在台灣的發展歷程，並探 the judicial role in the maintenance of the constitutional order and the 討法院在台灣維護憲政秩序和保障人權 protection of human rights in Taiwan. 等方面的角色。
Members of the Faculty of Law awarded for research and knowledge exchange
Achievements of 4 Faculty members were recognised at the HKU Excellence Awards Presentation Ceremony 2018 on March 29. Ms Cora Chan and Dr Gu Weixia won the “Outstanding Young Researcher Award”. Associate Professor Ms Rebecca Lee and Professor Lusina Ho were awarded the “University Knowledge Exchange Excellence Ms Cora Chan (left) receiving the “Outstanding Young Researcher Award” from Professor Andy Hor, Vice- Award” for their initiative “Introducing the President and Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Research) special needs trust to Hong Kong”, which 陳秀慧副教授從副校長(研究) 賀子森教授手上接過傑出青年研究學者獎狀
www.hk-lawyer.org 91 • May 2019
has subsequently lobbied the HKSAR Government to launch and operate a Special Needs Trust to help care for individuals with intellectual disability, and empowered and partnered with NGOs to campaign for improvement of the legal regime.
學院成員獲頒傑出研 究及知識交流獎
中國傳統中沒有現代的司法權觀念， 司法為統治者的工具。民國初期以 來，多個世代的法律人致力於建立健 全獨立的司法權。雖然1946年的《中 華民國憲法》建立了憲政體制下的司 Dr Gu Weixia (right) receiving the “Outstanding Young Researcher Award” from Professor Andy Hor, Vice- 法機構，但直到1990年代，台灣才 President and Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Research) 進入正常憲政狀態，司法改革取得成 顧維遐副教授從副校長(研究)賀子森教授手上接過傑出青年研究學者獎狀 果，審判獨立與司法品質逐漸受國際 社會肯定。3月26日，香港大學法律 學院鄭陳蘭如基金傑出訪問學人、台 灣司法院前院長，翁岳生教授主講公 開講座「台灣司法之現代化」，回溯 司法權在台灣的發展歷程，並探討法 院在台灣維護憲政秩序和保障人權等 方面的角色。 香港大學於3月29日舉 行2018年度卓越大獎頒獎典禮，以表 揚在教學、科研工作及知識交流上有 傑出成就的校內學者。今年法律學院 共有4位成員獲獎項肯定：陳秀慧及顧 維遐博士分膺「傑出青年研究學者」 ；而李穎芝副教授及何錦璇教授則憑 「為香港智障人士設立特殊需要信 託」獲得大學的「卓越知識交流獎」 ，二人建議獲香港特區政府採納，推 出信託計劃加強照顧智障人士；並且 Ms Rebecca Lee (middle) and Professor Lusina Ho (left) receiving the “Knowledge Exchange Excellence 與非政府組織合作，共同推動法律改 Award”. 革。 李穎芝副教授及何錦璇教授獲頒卓越知識交流獎
HKU confers honorary degrees 香港大學頒授名譽博士 upon Chief Justice Geoffrey Ma and 學位予馬道立法官及李 Justice Roberto Ribeiro 義法官
The 201st Congregation of HKU on April 2 sees the conferment of two 香港大學於4月2日舉行第201屆學位頒 Doctors of Laws honoris causa to The Honourable Chief Justice Geoffrey 授典禮，頒授名譽博士學位予四位傑出 Ma and The Honourable Mr Justice Roberto Alexandre Vieira Ribeiro of 人士，包括頒授名譽法學博士予終審法院 the Court of Final Appeal. The Faculty is extremely honoured that, on the 首席法官馬道立、及終審法院常任法官李 occasion of its 50th Anniversary, two of the most respected members 義。兩位法官深受法律界尊敬，李義法官 of the legal profession (Justice Ribeiro was also a Faculty member 曾於七十年代初於法律系任教，為學院奠 whose contribution was instrumental during the early days of the law 下的穩固根基。今次二人獲大學頒授名譽 school) are awarded the University’s honorary degree in recognition of 博士學位，以表揚和肯定他們對香港及法
92 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • CAMPUS VOICES 法學院新聞
their contribution to Hong Kong and the rule of law. On behalf of the 治的貢獻，適逢學院慶祝金禧院慶，實在 four honorary graduates, the Chief Justice gave a speech, stressing 榮幸之極。馬道立法官代表各名譽博士致 the importance of an independent Judiciary in Hong Kong and how 謝詞，強調司法獨立對香港至爲重要，並 we should not only respect one’s own rights and freedoms but also the 強調大衆除顧及自己的權利和自由，同時 rights and freedoms of others. 要尊重他人的權利和自由。
The Chief Justice Ma delivering a speech. Conferment of Degree of Doctor of Laws honoris causa upon the Hon Mr Justice Roberto Alexandre Vieira Ribeiro. 馬道立法官致詞 李義法官獲頒授名譽法學博士
Symposium on “Global Constitutionalism: Asia-Pacific Perspectives”
This Symposium held on 28-29 March 2019 at the Faculty of Law of The Chinese University of Hong Kong (“CUHK Law”) brought together a diverse group of scholars to discuss how polities in the Asia-Pacific region respond to the global spread of ideas and institutions of constitutionalism, and why they respond in a certain way.
The Symposium opened with a keynote speech by Professor Cheryl Saunders, Laureate Professor Emeritus at Melbourne Law School and President Emeritus of the International Association of Constitutional Law, who explored the extent to which if at all, the very concept of a constitution is undergoing change in the conditions of globalisation with particular reference to Asia. Participants explored the interrelated global, transnational, and local aspects of constitution-making, judicial review, and scholarly discourse with reference to East Asia, Southeast Asia, South Asia, and the Pacific states.
www.hk-lawyer.org 93 • May 2019
「全球憲政主義：亞太視 角」研討會
是次研討會於2019年3月28至29日在香港中文大 學法律學院召開，匯集不同領域的學者討論亞太地 區的政體如何及為何以某種方式應對憲政主義思想 與機構在全球的傳播。
該研討會以墨爾本大學法學院榮休講座教授及國際 憲法學協會名譽主席Cheryl Saunders教授的主題演 講揭開序幕。她探討了在全球化的背景下（尤其在 亞洲），「憲法」這個概念在多大程度上發生著 Professor Cheryl Saunders, Laureate Professor Albert Chen of HKU Faculty of Law Professor Emeritus at Melbourne Law spoke on “Constitutionalism without Full 變化。與會者參考東亞、東南亞、南亞和太平洋國 School, delivered a keynote speech on Democratization: The Case of Hong Kong under 家的情況，討論在全球、跨國和地區層面上憲法制 constitution transformation. ‘One Country, Two Systems’” at a panel session. 定、司法審查和學術話語的相互關聯。 墨爾本大學法學院榮休講座教授 港大法律學院陳弘毅教授在一節小組討論上 Cheryl Saunders教授發表題為憲法 演講「沒有完全民主化的憲政：以『一國兩 改革的主題演講。 制』為視角的香港案例」。
Professor Jyh-An Lee of CUHK Law (left) chairing a panel session presented by Dr Professor Stuart Hargreaves of CUHK Law (left) chairing a panel session presented by Chien-Chih Lin of Academia Sinica (middle) and Professor Bui Ngoc Son of CUHK Professor Akiko Ejima of Meiji University School of Law (middle) and Professor Yoon Jin Law (right). Shin of Seoul National University School of Law (right). 中大法律學院李治安教授(左)主持其中一節小組討論，發言人包括中央研究院林 中大法律學院Stuart Hargreaves教授(左)主持其中一節小組討論，發言人包括明 建志博士(中)和中大法律學院Bui Ngoc Son教授(右)。 治大學法學院江島晶子教授(中)和首爾大學法學院Yoon Jin Shin教授(右)。
Public Lecture on “Investigating Atrocity Crimes: From Syria to Myanmar” by Dr. Serge Brammertz
CUHK Law hosted this public lecture delivered by Dr. Serge Brammertz, Chief Prosecutor of the United Nations International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals (IRMCT), at its Graduate Law Centre on 26 March 2019.
Dr. Brammertz’s informative lecture outlines a turn of optimistic view towards the international criminal justice in the 1990s to a more realistic outlook in the new millennium, underscored by an absence of political consensus in the fight for international justice. In the face of atrocity crimes in Syria, Iraq, Kosovo, and Myanmar, solutions from the international community are limited, compared with the full-fledged investigations by ad hoc tribunals set up by the Security Council, but efforts continue. The Syrian mechanism, Iraqi Investigative Team, Kosovo Tribunal, and Myanmar mechanism are examples of such efforts; however, they oftentimes suffer from problems of selective justice, lack of jurisdiction, and lack of cooperation from states.
94 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • CAMPUS VOICES 法學院新聞
Serge Brammertz博士主 講「調查暴行罪：從敘 利亞到緬甸」公開講座
中大法律學院於2019年3月26日在其研究生 部舉辦公開講座，由聯合國國際刑事法庭餘 留機制的首席檢察官Serge Brammertz博士主 講。
Serge Brammertz博士的講座內容豐富， 概述了上個世紀90年代到新世紀初人們對 Dr. Serge Brammertz, Chief 國際刑事司法的態度由樂觀轉向現實，指 Prosecutor of the United Nations International Residual 出國際社會在爭取國際公義的過程中缺乏 Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals 政治共識。與安理會特設刑事法庭開展的 聯合國國際刑事法庭餘留機制 全方位調查相比，國際社會對發生在敘利 首席檢察官Serge Brammertz 博士 亞、伊拉克、科索沃及緬甸的殘暴罪行提 出的解決辦法十分有限，但是實現國際公 義的努力並沒有停止——敘利亞機制、伊 拉克調查小組、科索沃法庭及緬甸機制都 是例證。然而，這些努力往往因為選擇性 司法、缺乏管轄權與國家之間缺乏合作等 問題而受到局限。
Professor Robin Huang Wins 黃輝教授研究項 Major Project Grant from 目獲上海金融法 Shanghai Financial Court 院重點撥款
On 20 March 2019, the Shanghai Financial Court 上海金融法院於2019年3月20 announced that Professor Robin Huang of CUHK 日宣布，中大法律學院黃輝教 Law won a major grant for his project entitled “Legal 授的研究項目「科創板註冊制 Enforcement Mechanisms for the Science and 法律實施機制研究」獲選重點 Technology Innovation Board (STIB) and Registration- 課題。黃輝教授的研究項目從 based IPO System”. Professor Huang’s project was one 全國參選的48項申請中脫穎而 of the three major grants awarded, along with 10 other 出，成為三個重點課題之一， ordinary grants, against a total of 48 applications from 同時獲選的還有10個一般課 around the country. 題。 Professor Robin Huang 黃輝教授 The recent establishment of the STIB is a significant 新近科創板的設立是中國吸引 effort of China to attract the listing of companies that 響應國家戰略，具備新興技 possess new, critical technology in line with national 術、關鍵技術的公司上市的重 strategy. The extent of its success will depend 要舉措，其成功與否根本上取 essentially on how legal enforcement mechanisms 決於如何設計法律實施機制來 are designed to protect investors, particularly by 保護投資者，而近期成立的中 the Shanghai Financial Court which was recently 國首個受理金融糾紛的上海金 set up as the first and only specialist court in China 融法院對投資者保護起到了尤 for hearing financial disputes. Professor Huang’s 為重要的作用。黃輝教授的課 research project aims to address the above issue, 題致力於探討上述問題，因而 thereby making a direct and significant impact on the 可對中國金融市場及整個金融 development of China’s capital markets and society 社會的發展產生直接而重要的 at large. 影響。
www.hk-lawyer.org 95 • May 2019
Hong Kong Basic Law Handbook 2nd Edition by Professors Michael Ramsden and Stuart Hargreaves
The Hong Kong Basic Law Handbook is the leading authority on judicial consideration of the Hong Kong Basic Law. Thoroughly revised for its second edition, the Handbook canvasses new developments in Hong Kong’s constitutional law including the addition of a fourth step in the proportionality test, the recognition of an overseas same-sex marriage for the purposes of a visa, a judicial review brought against the cessation of local jurisdiction over a portion of the Kowloon high speed rail terminal, and the issuance by the Standing Committee of an Interpretation of the Basic Law relating to the oath-taking requirements of legislative councillors.
The second edition of the Handbook is authored by Professors Michael Ramsden and Stuart Hargreaves of CUHK Law, with a new foreword by the Honourable Mr Justice Bokhary GBM, NPJ. The book is published by Sweet & Maxwell and is available at https://qrgo.page.link/p76U.
Michael Ramsden和Stuart Hargreaves 教授編寫第二版《Hong Kong Basic Law Handbook》
《Hong Kong Basic Law Handbook》為有關《香港基本法》的司法考量提供了權威性的觀點。經充分修訂，該書的 第二版探討了香港憲法的新發展，包括在均衡比例測試中增加第四個步驟、為簽證目的承認海外同性婚姻、對九龍高 鐵終點站的部分地方管轄權的中止進行司法覆核，以及全國人大常委會就立法會議員的宣誓要求解釋《基本法》等。
該書的第二版由中大法律學院Michael Ramsden教授與Stuart Hargreaves教授編寫，並由香港終審法院非常任法官包 致金法官GBM, NPJ重新撰序。該書由Sweet & Maxwell出版，詳情請瀏覽https://qrgo.page.link/p76U。
CUHK Law Students Win the 8th Hong Kong Human Rights Moot
CUHK Law won the championship at the 8th Hong Kong Human Rights Moot held at the CUHK Graduate Law Centre on 23 March 2019.
The winning team of CUHK Law students, Samuel Leung (PCLL) and Jeremiah Lau (PCLL), prevailed over 46 teams and 92 students who entered the competition. They were also given the award for Best Written Submissions. The CUHK Winning Team Samuel Leung (2nd from left) and Jeremiah Lau (3rd from left), with the sponsor Mr Michael Vidler (left) and the presiding judge Dr Gerard McCoy QC, SC (right). Samuel and Jeremiah In the competition, the finalist teams from CUHK and HKU argued a also won the prize for Best Written Submissions. topical moot question concerning issues of freedom of expression and 勝出決賽的中大團隊Samuel Leung (左二)和Jeremiah Lau(左 三)與贊助者韋智達律師(左)及模擬法官麥高義資深大律師(右)合 press freedom arising from facts similar to the Victor Mallet controversy 照。Samuel和 Jeremiah同時奪得最佳書面作品獎。 in October 2018.
This year, the competition is sponsored by Vidler & Co. Solicitors and co-hosted by CUHK and HKU. The final round bench was composed of Dr Gerard McCoy QC, SC of Gilt Chambers; Professor Michael Hor, Dean of HKU Faculty of Law; and Professor Michael Ramsden, Associate Professor of CUHK Faculty of Law.
The Hong Kong Human Rights Moot was first launched in 2010 seeking to raise awareness amongst law students of human rights
96 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • CAMPUS VOICES 法學院新聞
issues relevant to Hong Kong. Previous moot questions have touched on access to social housing, race discrimination, recognition of foreign registered same-sex marriages, policing of non-violent demonstrations and prisoners’ rights.
中大法律學院學生於第八屆 香港人權模擬法庭比賽奪冠
中大法律學院學生於第八屆香港人權模擬法庭比賽中 The adjudicating panel of the 8th Hong Kong Human Rights Moot 2019 (from left): Professor Michael Hor, Dean of HKU Law Faculty; Dr Gerard McCoy QC, SC of Gilt 勇奪冠軍。是次比賽於2019年3月23日在學院的研究 Chambers; Professor Michael Ramsden, Associate Professor of CUHK Law. 生部舉行。 第八屆香港人權模擬法庭決賽的模擬法官包括(左起)：港大法律學院院長何 耀明教授、Gilt Chambers的麥高義資深大律師和中大法律學院副教授Michael Ramsden教授。 來自中大法律專業證書課程的學生Samuel Leung和 Jeremiah Lau擊敗46支參賽隊伍和92名參賽學生取得 最終勝利。他們同時贏得最佳書面作品獎。
入圍決賽的中大和港大團隊就言論自由與新聞自由的 題目展開辯論，辯題所依據的案件事實與2018年10月 外國記者Victor Mallet遭驅逐而產生的諸多爭議相似。
今年，比賽由韋智達律師行贊助、香港中文大學和香 港大學合辦。決賽的模擬法官包括：Gilt Chambers的 麥高義資深大律師、港大法律學院院長何耀明教授和 中大法律學院副教授Michael Ramsden。
Finalists, judges and sponsor of the 8th Hong Kong Human Rights Moot. 香港人權模擬法庭於2010年首辦，旨在提高法律學生 第八屆香港人權模擬法庭比賽的決賽參賽者、模擬法官和贊助者。 對與香港人權議題的認識。以往的模擬法庭辯題包括 獲取公共房屋權利、種族歧視、承認外國登記的同性 婚姻、對非暴力示威的警務行動以及囚犯權利。
The 16th Willem C. Vis East International Commercial Arbitration Moot
The CUHK moot team won two significant awards at the 16th Willem C. Vis East International Commercial Arbitration Moot concluded on 7 April 2019 – “David Hunter Award For Best Memorandum on Behalf of Claimant” for being placed 1st out of some 130 participating law schools for this memorandum, and “Honourable Mention (top 10%) For Best Memorandum on Behalf of Respondent”, which is also a mark of distinction.
Representatives of the CUHK winning team of “David Hunter Award For Best Professor Peter Rhodes and Vis Moot Student Memorandum on Behalf of Claimant” and “Honourable Mention (top 10%) For Best Memorandum on Behalf of Respondent”, with Director of Vis East Coaches Delivered Invited Keynote Address at The International Arbitration Moot (3rd from left). Austrian Supreme Court, Vienna 榮獲「David Hunter Award For Best Memorandum on Behalf of Claimant」 和「Honourable Mention (top 10%) For Best Memorandum on Behalf of Respondent」的中大法律學院賽隊代表學生與Vis East國際商務仲裁模擬 On 12 April 2019, Professor Peter Rhodes and the CUHK Vis Moot 法庭辯論賽總監(左三)合照留念。 student coaches, Toni Chan, Tommy Chung, Jeremiah Lau and Matthew Suen, delivered a keynote address at a Pre-Moot event
www.hk-lawyer.org 97 • May 2019
in the Austrian Supreme Court in Vienna. The CUHK presenta- tion was titled “Seeking Success and Enjoyment: The Chinese University of Hong Kong’s Vis Moot Experience”. Professor Peter Rhodes discussed the building of a mooting culture at CUHK and taking the Vis Moot team from humble beginnings in 2006 to champions in 2016. The student coaches talked about their Vis Moot participation as “Their Best Law School Experience”. The presentation was well received and attended by Austrian Supreme Court judges, leading international arbitrators, distin- guished lawyers and invited students.
第16屆Willem C. Vis East 國際 Representatives of the CUHK Vis moot team (from left): Tommy Chung (PCLL); 商務仲裁模擬法庭辯論賽 Alex Chan (JD); Yung Yuk Ting (PCLL); Bobo Chan (LLB); and Nicole Xiao (JD). 中大法律學院賽隊代表學生(左起)：鍾俊豪 (PCLL)、陳俊熹 (JD)、 翁鈺 婷 (PCLL)、 陳奕安 (LLB)和肖予諾 (JD)。 中大法律學院學生在2019年4月7日完結的第16屆Willem C. Vis East國際商務仲裁模擬法庭辯論賽中獲得兩個重要 獎項，包括「David Hunter Award For Best Memorandum on Behalf of Claimant」（以表揚中大在全球約130所 參賽法律學院中於此項目榮獲第一）及「Honourable Mention (top 10%) For Best Memorandum on Behalf of Respondent」。
羅德士教授與Vis Moot學生領導員獲邀於維也 納Austrian Supreme Court發表主題演講
2019年4月12日，羅德士教授與中大Vis Moot學生領導 員陳玄同、鍾俊豪、劉天証及孫晧邦於維也納Austrian Supreme Court舉行的Pre-Moot活動上發表主題演講，題 目為「追尋成功與快樂：香港中文大學的Vis Moot經驗分 享」。羅德士教授分享了中大構建模擬法庭文化的過程， 並介紹其Vis Moot比賽團隊從2006年開始至2016年奪冠 的過程。學生領導員形容參與Vis Moot是他們「在法律學 院最棒的經歷」。演講獲得在場人士歡迎，包括Austrian Supreme Court的諸位法官、知名國際仲裁員、傑出律師和 獲邀出席的學生。
Professor Peter Rhodes (right) and the CUHK Vis Moot student coaches, Toni Chan, Tommy Chung, Jeremiah Lau and Matthew Suen. 羅德士教授(右)與中大Vis Moot學生領導員陳玄同、鍾俊豪、劉天証及孫晧邦。
98 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • CAMPUS VOICES 法學院新聞
“3D Printing, Innovation and Intellectual Property” & Launch Event for the 3DPIP Futures Final Report
This event held on 29 March 2019 at the CUHK Graduate Law Centre showcased interdisciplinary perspectives on 3D printing, IP and innovation from leading scholars, and launched the final report from the UK Intellectual Professor Angela Daly of CUHK Law (2nd from left), with Dr Jiajie Lu of Dongguan University of Technology College of Literature and Media (left), Professor Hing Kai Chan of Nottingham Property Office-funded project “3D Printing and IP University Business School China (2nd from right)and Professor Marcelo Thompson of HKU Futures”, led by Professor Angela Daly of CUHK Law. Faculty of Law (right). 中大法律學院Angela Daly教授(左二)與東莞理工學院文學與傳媒學院Jiajie Lu博士 The event was presented by Professor Hing Kai Chan (左)、諾丁漢大學商學院（中國）陳慶佳教授(右二)，以及港大法律學院Marcelo of Nottingham University Business School China, Dr Thompson教授(右)。 Jiajie Lu of Dongguan University of Technology College of Literature and Media, and Professor Angela Daly of CUHK Law, with Professor Marcelo Thompson of HKU Faculty of Law attending as the discussant. Details are available at https://3dpipfutures.com/.
「3D打印、創新和知識產 權」及3DPIP Futures Final Report發布會
是次活動於2019年3月29日在中大法律學院研究 生部舉行，展示了領先學者在3D打印、知識產 權和創新發展問題上的跨學科觀點，並發布了由 英國 Intellectual Property Office資助、中大法律 學院Angela Daly教授帶領的「3D Printing and IP Futures」計劃的總結報告。活動由諾丁漢大學商 學院（中國）陳慶佳教授、東莞理工學院文學與傳 媒學院Jiajie Lu博士及中大法律學院Angela Daly教 授主講，港大法律學院Marcelo Thompson教授評 論。詳情請瀏覽https://3dpipfutures.com/。
CUHK LLM in Energy and Environmental Law Students Presented at International Workshop in Bangkok
Four CUHK Law students from the LLM in Energy and Environmental Law (LEL) and the JD Programmes presented papers at the international workshop on “Carbon Markets and the Electricity Sector: Issues, Opportunities, and Priorities for East Asia”, which was Professor Anatole Boute (4th from right) with the CUHK Law student presenters at the workshop. held in Bangkok, Thailand on 21-22 March 2019. Anatole Boute教授(右四)與中大法律學院演講學生。
www.hk-lawyer.org 99 • May 2019
Jointly organised by the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung 中大能源與環境法法學碩士生於 RECAP, Chulalongkorn University, International Carbon Action Partnership (ICAP), Thailand 曼谷國際研討會發表演講 Greenhouse Gas Management Organization (TGO) and CUHK Law, the workshop was finalised with 四名來自中大法律學院能源與環境法法學碩士和法律博士課程 presentations by students from CUHK Law and 的學生於國際研討會「碳市場與電業：東亞面臨的問題、機遇 Chulalungkorn University, who shared their research 與重點」發表演講，研討會於2019年3月21-22日在泰國曼谷 on the interaction of emissions trading and electricity 舉行。 regulation with representatives of major international energy organisations, national policymakers, and 是次研討會由Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung RECAP、泰國朱 energy law and policy professors from the EU, China, 拉隆功大學、國際碳行動夥伴組織（International Carbon USA and Thailand. Action Partnership）、Thailand Greenhouse Gas Management Organization及中大法律學院合辦。研討會以中大及朱拉隆功大 The LEL aims to offer students an in-depth 學學生的演講作結。兩校學生在會上與主要的國際能源組織代 understanding of the legal aspects governing the 表、國家政策制定者，以及來自歐盟、中國、美國和泰國的能 key challenges of energy security and environmental 源法及政策教授們分享他們對排放交易與電力規管的研究成果。 protection. In its first intake in 2018, the Programme admitted 50 students and attracted applicants from 中大能源與環境法法學碩士課程旨在從法律學角度讓學生深 18 countries, including 11 “Belt and Road” countries 入理解能源安全和環境保護的主要挑戰。課程於2018年取錄 such as Georgia, India, Papua New Guinea, etc. Details 了首批50名學生，吸引來自18個國家的申請者，包括格魯吉 of the Programme are available at http://www.law. 亞、印度、巴布亞新畿內亞等11個「一帶一路」國家。詳情請 cuhk.edu.hk/en/study/llm-lel_programme-overview. 瀏覽http://www.law.cuhk.edu.hk/en/study/llm-lel_programme- php. overview.php。
Photo Day for 法律學士2019畢業班 LLB Graduating Class 2019 拍照日
The Photo Day for the CUHK LLB graduating class of 2019 was held on 中大法律學士2019畢業班的拍照日於2019 11 April 2019. The Faculty Dean, LLB programme director and deputy 年4月11日舉行。法律學院院長、法律學士 director, and academic staff joined to take photos and to share the joy and 課程主任及副主任和教師出席與畢業班學生 achievements with the graduating students on this memorable occasion. 合照，分享他們的喜悅和成就。
100 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • CAMPUS VOICES 法學院新聞
The 24th Goff Arbitration Lecture by 第二十四屆戈夫仲裁講座 Mr Neil Kaplan: 香港國際仲裁中心前主 “Isn’t 700 Years Long Enough? – 席嘉柏倫御用大律師講 Time to Think Again about Costs” 解仲裁成本問題
The CityU School of Law hosted the 24th Goff Arbitration Lecture 2019年4月2日，由香港城市大學(城大)法律 on 2 April 2019 at the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre 學院舉辦的第二十四屆戈夫仲裁講座於香港國 (HKIAC). This year, we are honoured to have Mr Neil Kaplan CBE QC 際仲裁中心舉行。今年，學院很榮幸再次邀請 SBS, a preeminent international arbitrator, who also delivered the 6th 到知名仲裁員嘉柏倫先生(Mr Neil Kaplan CBE Goff Arbitration Lecture back in 1995, as the speaker to give a lecture QC SBS)作演講嘉賓。嘉柏倫先生曾在1995 again. This year’s lecture focused on the question of costs in arbitration. 年的第六屆戈夫仲裁講座擔任主講嘉賓。這 Renowned legal practitioners such as Matthew Gearing QC, Chairperson 次講座探討仲裁成本問題，吸引了一百餘人 of HKIAC and Rimsky Yuen Kwok-keung, GBM, SC, JP among about 100 參加，其中不乏城中大狀，如香港國際仲裁 attendants participated. 中心主席兼御用大律師祈文輝先生(Matthew Gearing QC)和袁國強資深大律師等。 The lecture was kicked off by the speech of Dr Christopher To (Adjunct Professor and LLMArbDR Programme Director of CityU School of Law), 講座由城大法律學院客席教授、仲裁及爭議解 who introduced the speaker, welcomed all the participants and thanked 決學法學碩士課程主任陶榮博士(Dr Christopher them for their support for the lecture. To)致歡迎辭揭開序幕。他介紹了嘉柏倫先 生，歡迎並感謝所有觀眾對講座的支持。 Mr Kaplan’s lecture is titled “Isn’t 700 Years Long Enough? – Time to Think Again about Costs”. The crucial question he addressed in the 嘉柏倫先生的演講題為「700年不夠長嗎？是 lecture is why the English cost shifting rule is being around for 700 years 時候再考慮成本問題了」。他在講座中闡釋
www.hk-lawyer.org 101 • May 2019
in England. He explained that the cost shifting rule, that is, “costs follow 為何英國的成本轉移規則執行近700年。他解 the event”, requests the losing party to compensate the winner for its 釋說成本轉移規則就是敗訴一方承擔對方的 costs. According to him, law often lags behind social change, so we 仲裁費用。他認為，法律往往落後於社會變 should not necessarily be bound by the age of the law, but to examine it 革，所以我們不一定要受時代的束縛，而是 in light of current circumstances. 要根據當前的情況審視法律。
He then traced the historical background of the cost shifting rule and 然後，他追溯了成本轉移規則的歷史背景， examined changes occurred to justify a reconsideration of the rule. Some 並分析了重新考慮該規則的必要性。他提到 of the factors he mentioned included the fact that society is becoming 的影響因素包括：社會變得越來越複雜，從 more complex which in term impacts on the complexity of disputes; the 而影響了爭議的複雜性；法律干預的領域增 areas law intervenes in have increased numerously; arbitration becomes 多；仲裁成為不同司法管轄區解決爭議的第 the third method of resolving disputes through entities in different 三種方法；仲裁案件的費用急劇增加等。他 jurisdictions; the fees for arbitration cases have been increased sharply, 認為所有這些因素都增加了仲裁的成本和複 etc. He said that all these factors added to the cost and complexity of 雜性。 arbitration. 在講座中，他還將英國規則與美國規則，即 In the lecture, he also compared the American rule, that is, each party 當事人各方承擔仲裁產生的費用，進行了比 bears its own costs, with the English rule; reviewed various criticisms 較；回顧性分析了實證研究中對英國規則的 with regard to the English rule in empirical studies and gave some 各種批評，並提出了完善成本轉移規則的建 suggestions on how we can do better. 議。
After the lecture, the participants raised interesting questions and 演講結束之後，聽眾踴躍提問，與講者積極 interacted with Mr Kaplan in the Q & A session moderated by Dr 互動。提問環節由陶榮博士主持。最後，城 Christopher To. Finally, Prof Geraint Howells (Dean of School of Law, 大法律學院院長及商業法講座教授賀嘉倫教 CityU and Chair Professor, Commercial Law) gave a vote of thanks and 授(Prof Geraint Howells)致送紀念品，向講者 presented a gift to Mr Kaplan in thanking him for delivering an insightful 嘉柏倫先生致謝，是次講座圓滿結束。 lecture. 戈夫仲裁講座背景： Goff Arbitration Lecture: 戈夫仲裁講座於1990年首次由城市大學舉 The Goff Lecture was instituted in 1990 by the City University of 辦，以慶祝成立仲裁及爭議解決學文學碩士 Hong Kong to celebrate the commencement of our Master of Arts in 課程。首屆演講是由上議院大法官戈夫(Lord Arbitration and Dispute Resolution. The first lecture was delivered Goff of Chieveley)主持，並以他名字來命名。 by Lord Goff of Chieveley, Lord of Appeal, who then consented to 本講座為仲裁界的學者和業界人士提供一個 the series bearing his name. The Goff Lecture provides an excellent 互相討論和交流意見的良好機會。過去多年 opportunity for discussion and exchange of views among practitioners 來，講座已邀請23位傑出仲裁學者來分享他 and academics in the arbitration field. Over the years, the Goff 們的洞見。 Arbitration Lecture has gathered 23 eminent scholars to share their views on arbitration. 關於講者： 嘉柏倫先生，英國司令勛章、皇家大律師、 About the Speaker: 銀紫荊星章，自1995年起擔任全職仲裁 Neil Kaplan CBE QC SBS has been a full-time practising arbitrator 員。在此期間，他曾擔任幾百起仲裁案件的 since 1995. During this period he has been involved in several 聯席仲裁員、獨立仲裁員以及主席。除了在 hundred arbitrations as co-arbitrator, sole arbitrator or chairman 英國和香港作仲裁員之外，他也在美國、加 in England and Hong Kong, but also in the USA, Canada, France, 拿大、法國、德國、克羅地亞、奧地利、 Germany, Croatia, Austria, Philippines, China, Laos, Japan, the 菲律賓、中國、老撾、日本、荷蘭、馬來西 Netherlands, Malaysia, Australia, Denmark, Sweden and South 亞、澳大利亞、丹麥、瑞典及南非開展仲 Africa. 裁。
Called to the Bar of England and Wales in 1965, Neil Kaplan has 嘉柏倫先生於1965年加入英格蘭及威爾士大 practiced as a barrister, Principal Crown Counsel at the Hong Kong 律師協會，在香港律政司擔任首席檢察官， Attorney General’s Chambers, and served as a Judge of the Supreme 並曾在香港最高法院擔任法官，主審建築及 Court of Hong Kong in charge of the Construction and Arbitration 仲裁案件。嘉柏倫先生也曾擔任香港國際仲 List. He is also past Chairman of the HKIAC and past President of the 裁中心的主席及英國特許仲裁員學會主席。 Chartered Institute of Arbitrators. He is a Governing Board Member of the 他如今是國際商會仲裁委員會理事會成員。 International Council of Commercial Arbitration (ICCA) and a panelist of 此外，他亦是包括中國國際經濟貿易仲裁 several arbitral institutions including China International Economic and 委員會以及其它一系列仲裁機構的專家組成 Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC). 員。
102 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • CAMPUS VOICES 法學院新聞
Ceremony of 2018-19 Admission 2018-19入學獎學金、 Scholarships, Sir Oswald Cheung 張奧偉爵士紀念基金法 Memorial Fund PCLL Scholarship & 學專業證書獎學金及 2017-18 Outstanding Performance in 2017-18模擬法庭比賽 Mooting Competitions 傑出表現頒獎典禮
The School of Law, City University of Hong Kong (CityU) held the 2019年4月2日，香港城市大學(城大)法律 Ceremony of 2018-19 Admission Scholarships, Sir Oswald Cheung 學院舉辦了盛大的2018-19入學獎學金、 Memorial Fund PCLL Scholarship & 2017-18 Outstanding Performance in 張奧偉爵士紀念基金法學專業證書獎學金 Mooting Competitions on 2 April 2019. The Ceremony was well attended 及2017-18模擬法庭比賽傑出表現頒獎典 by award recipients, their family members, distinguished guests, coaches 禮。得獎學生及其家人、嘉賓、模擬法庭比 of mooting competitions, relevant programme directors and faculty 賽導師、課程主任及學院老師均踴躍出席典 members. 禮。
Dean Professor Geraint HOWELLS welcomed all participants to the 法律學院院長賀嘉倫教授歡迎各來賓出席典 Ceremony. He congratulated all the awardees and thanked the efforts of 禮。他向所有獲獎者表示祝賀，並感謝入 the school principals, teachers and families of the Scholarship recipients. 學獎學金得獎學生的中學校長，老師及其家 He praised mooters for their determination and commitment, extended his 人。他讚揚隊員們在模擬法庭比賽中展現的 heartfelt congratulations to all the mooters and expressed appreciation to 決心和投入，對所有隊員致衷心的祝賀，並 the coaches and staff involved in mooting. 感謝導師們和同事們在過程中予以悉心的指 導及無限量支持。 In order to reward outstanding students who are admitted to the School of Law’s programmes, the School has established admission scholarships. 法律學院成立入學獎學金以獎勵成績優異 Four LLB, ten PCLL, three LLM and one LLMArbDR students were awarded 而入讀法律學院轄下課程的學生。四名法 the 2018-19 Admission Scholarships. Our Associate Dean, Professor LIN 律學學士課程學生、十名法學專業證書課 Feng and respective Programme Directors presented the Admission 程學生、三名法學碩士課程學生及一名法學 Scholarships to the programme students. 碩士（仲裁及爭議解決學）課程學生榮獲 2018-19入學獎學金，法律學院副院長林峰 The School’s mooting team achieved outstanding performance in different 教授和有關課程的課程主任頒獎予得獎學 mooting competitions in 2017-18, including the 2018 Philip C. Jessup 生。 International Law Moot Court Competition (Hong Kong Regional Round) held on 25 February 2018, the 8 th Asia-Pacific M&A Moot Competition 於2017-18年度，學生在多項地區的模 held on 9 March 2018, the 15th Annual Willem C. Vis (East) International 擬法庭比賽取得優秀成績。這些比賽包 Commercial Arbitration Moot held in Hong Kong from 11 March to 18 括：2018菲立斯國際法模擬法庭比賽香港 March 2018, the 25 th Annual Willem C. Vis International Commercial 地區賽，第八屆亞太地區企業併購模擬競 Arbitration Moot held in Vienna from 23 to 29 March 2018, and Manfred 賽，第15屆維斯（東方）國際商事仲裁模擬
www.hk-lawyer.org 103 • May 2019
Lachs Space Law Moot Court Competition held in Adelaide from 11 to 13 法庭辯論賽，第25屆維斯國際商事仲裁模擬 April 2018. 法庭辯論賽，及Manfred Lachs空間法模擬 法庭辯論賽。 The School’s mooting team attained great achievements in these competitions. That was mainly due to the great effort of the students and 憑著學生的努力以及導師們的培訓和鼓 also the training and encouragement of their coaches. Our Dean Professor 勵，隊員們在模擬法庭比賽中取得了優秀 Geraint HOWELLS presented the certificates to them to thank them for 成績。法律學院院長賀教授頒發證書予模 their hard work and great contributions. 擬法庭比賽導師，感謝他們的努力和出色 的貢獻。 The School was honoured to have the presence of the following distinguished guests: 學院很榮幸有以下貴賓出席：
Mr MAK Yip Shing Andrew, Director of Sir Oswald Cheung Memorial Fund, 張奧偉爵士紀念基金董事麥業成先生發表演 delivered a speech to show support and share the joy of the scholarship 講以表示支持並分享得獎者的喜悅。他還感 recipients and mooters. He also thanked the School for the support of 謝學院對基金會的支持，並鼓勵學生加入法 the Fund and encouraged the students to join the legal profession and 律專業，為社會做出貢獻。 contribute to the society. 香港律師會副會長陳澤銘先生與觀眾分享從 Mr C.M. CHAN, Vice-President of the Law Society of Hong Kong shared 法律研究中所學到的知識和技能，將對學生 with the audience that the knowledge and skills of advocacy learnt from 終身受用。 the legal study would be beneficial to students’ lifelong use. 香港大律師公會主席戴啟思資深大律師鼓勵 Mr Philip DYKES SC, Chairman of Hong Kong Bar Association encouraged 學生在出庭時牢記法律的實際應用。 students to bear in mind the practicalities when doing advocacy. 各嘉賓發表演講後，城大法律學院模擬法庭 After the speeches delivered by the guests, Dr Mark KIELSGARD, Director 辯論總監Mark Kielsgard博士讚揚城大模擬 of Mooting praised the high quality of the CityU Mooting teams with 法庭辯論隊員，通過他們的努力、專注和投 their great effort, focus and commitment of the mooters. The mooters 入，成為一支高質素的團隊。這團隊是我們 are the best embassadors of our law school to the legal industry. He also 學院對法律界最好的大使。他還對大學、法 expressed his heartfelt gratitude to the support from the University, the 律學院、學院行政人員、模擬法庭比賽導師 Law School, the administrative staff, the coaches and the parents along 及得獎學生父母於期間的支持表示衷心的感 the way. 謝。
Dean Professor Geraint HOWELLS presented the souvenirs to all 院長賀教授致送紀念品予各位嘉賓，隨後邀 distinguished guests, followed by a group photos with them. 請眾人大合照。
Public Lecture on Transnational Corporations and International Law
The School of Law of CityU was honoured to have Mr. Hu Bin (Deputy Director-General, Department of Treaty and Law, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, P.R.China) to give a lecture titled “Transnational Corporations and International Law” on April 3, 2019. The lecture room is full with nearly a hundred participants.
A welcoming speech was given by Professor Lin Feng (Associate Dean, School of Law) in
104 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • CAMPUS VOICES 法學院新聞
which he thanked Mr. Hu for coming to CityU to deliver the seminar.
Mr. Hu emphasised that the realisation of human rights over trading and investments has been hanging in the balance, with “Zero text” and “ISDS” issued by United Nation (UN) and the “Long-Arm Sanction” enforced by United States (USA) as the three reasons. In the wake of ratifications from UN and USA, the international community accused such implementation would be in breach of international law, international humanitarian law and the norms and principles contributing to peaceful relations among countries. As most countries undergo a lengthy struggle, sanction was imposed by European Union (EU) over USA there and then and so as International Court of Justice (ICJ) shortly afterwards. This might be a big stride in constraining USA, one question remained, would America’s legal overreach wind up diminishing American power?
After Mr. Hu’s lecture, the participants had an animated discussion with Mr. Hu. Professor Lin presented a souvenir to him as a token of appreciation for his insightful lecture on behalf of the School of Law.
「跨國公司和國際法」公開講座
2019年4月3日，香港城市大學法律學院榮幸地邀請到中華 人民共和國外交部條約法律司副司長胡斌先生主講題為“ 跨國公司與國際法”的公開講座。近百名參與者聚集於演 講廳。
講座正式開始前，城大法律學院副院長林峰教授致歡迎 辭，感謝胡先生來到主講公開講座。
講座上，胡先生強調聯合國頒布的“零文本”和“國家爭 議機制”以及美國強制執行的“長臂制裁”是阻礙人權在 貿易和投資方面實現的三個原因。而在聯合國和美國的實 施之後，國際社會指責這是違反國際法、國際人道法和阻 礙各國之間的和平關係。正當大多數國家還沒作出相關應 對，歐盟和國際法院率先對美國實施了制裁。這可能是制 衡美國的一大步，但未能決定這是否會減少美國的權力。
講座後，參與者踴躍提問，與講者積極交流。最後，林教 授感謝胡先生富有洞察力的演講，並代表香港城市大學法 律學院向講者贈送紀念品。
www.hk-lawyer.org 105 • May 2019
LEGAL TRIVIA #56
The Civil Justice Reforms have been in place for many years now. This quiz tests readers knowledge of some the history to and changes brought in by the CJR.
1. Who was the Chairman of the 5. The CJR introduced Order 1A of 8. Prior to the CJR was leave to appeal Working Party on Civil Justice the Rules of the High Court which to the Court of Appeal required Reforms? set out the Underlying Objectives for appeals from substantive of the CJR. What is the equivalent interlocutory decisions of judges? A. Justice Patrick Chan rule called in England & Wales? B. Justice Geoffrey Ma A. Yes C. Jusice Robert Ribeiro A. Underlying Objectives B. No. B. Overriding Objective 2. When did Hong Kong’s Civil Justice C. Guiding Principles 9. The Final Report on Civil Reforms come into effect? D. Underlying Principles Justice Reform recommended consideration be given to the A. 2 April 2007 6. Prior to the CJR a Case establishment of a specialist IP/ B. 2 April 2008 Management Summons was IT list. Has this been done? C. 2 April 2009 called what? D. 2 April 2010 A. Yes, a list has been established A. Case Directions Summons B. No 3. Hong Kong’s civil justice reforms B. Summons for Directions C. A list is under consideration follow on from reforms made in C. Directons Summons England and Wales as a result of D. There was no equivalent 10. The CJR introduced mediation as a report by which English judge? a form of dispute resolution. Is 7. A sanctioned payment was pre- mediation mandatory? A. Lord Denning CJR referred to as what? B. Lord Neueberger A. Yes. C. Lord Woolf A. Calderbank payment B. No. B. Payment in offer of settlement C. No, but failure to actively engage 4. When did the review of the C. Settlement Payment mediation may result in costs Hong Kong Civil Justice system D. Payment into court consequences. commence?
A. 1998 B. 2000 C. 2002 The name of the winner of the Legal Trivia Quiz #55 can be found D. 2004 on page 3 in the April 2019 issue of Hong Kong Lawyer.
Answers to Legal Trivia Quiz #55
1. B. The plaintiff name at first instance was Mr Broderip another creditor of A Salomon Co Ltd. 2. C. Mrs Donoghue claimed to have found the decomposed remains of a snail in ginger beer. 3. B. Mr Anton Piller was the founder of Anton Piller KG in 1909. (See http://www.piller.com/en-GB/documents/578/piller-100-years-en.pdf for a history of the company including a picture of Mr Piller himself!) 4. D. On the voyage that gave rise to the case, the Mareva was carrying fertilizer. 5. C. The Norwich Pharmacal Company was founded in New York State, United States. 6. D. Mrs Carlill caught influenza which, amongst other things, the Carbolic Smokeball was meant to prevent. 7. B. Mr Woolmington was accused of murdering his wife. 8. D. PJS’s husband is a famous singer. 9. D. The American Cyanamid case involved a claim for infringement of a patent for artificial absorbable surgical sutures, to wit, a surgical product. 10. C. In the High Trees House case rent was agreed to be reduced due to the impact of WWII – when up to third of the population of London left the city.
106 www.hk-lawyer.org May 2019 • LEGAL TRIVIA QUIZ 法律知識測驗
法律知識測驗 #56
民事司法制度改革已經實施了多年。本問答測試讀者對司法制度改革帶來的歷史 和變化的一些瞭解。
1. 民事司法制度改革工作小組主席 5. 民事司法制度改革提出《高等法 8. 在民事司法制度改革之前，就法 是誰？ 院規則》第1A號命令，列明其 官的實體性非正審裁決向上訴法 基本目標或民事司法制度改革原 庭提出上訴是需要「上訴許可」 A. 陳兆愷法官 則。英格蘭和威爾士的同等規則 嗎？ B. 馬道立法官 是什麼？ C. 李義法官 A. 是 A. 基本目標 B. 沒有 2. 香港的民事司法制度改革是何時 B. 壓倒一切的目標 開始實行的？ C. 指導原則 9. 關於民事司法制度改革的最後報 D. 基本原則 告建議考慮設立一個專門的知識 A. 2007年4月2日 產權/信息技術的審訊表。這樣 B. 2008年4月2日 6. 在民事司法制度改革之前，案件 做了嗎？ C. 2009年4月2日 管理傳票被稱為什麼？ D. 2010年4月2日 A. 是的，已經確定了一個審訊表 A. 案件指示傳票 B. 否 3. 香港的民事司法改革是根據哪一 B. 要求作指示的傳票 C. 正在商議一個審訊表 位英國法官的報告，繼英格蘭和 C. 指示傳票 威爾士的改革之後而進行的？ D. 沒有同等的名稱 10. 民事司法制度改革將調解引入作 為解決爭端的一種方式。調解是 A. 丹甯勳爵 (Lord Denning) 7. 「附帶條款付款」在民事司法制 強制性的嗎？ B. 紐伯格勳爵 (Lord Neueberger) 度改革之前被稱為什麼？ C. 伍爾夫勳爵 (Lord Woolf) A. 是的 A. 「考爾班德克」付款 B. 不是 4. 香港民事司法制度的檢討是何時 B. 提議和解的付款 C. 不是，但不積極調解可能會造 開始的？ C. 和解付款 成訟費的後果。 D. 向法院付款 A. 1998年 B. 2000年 C. 2002年 D. 2004年
第55期「法律知識測驗」的獲奬者姓名可在《香港律師》 2019年4月號第3頁找到。
法律知識測驗#55的答案
1. B. 初審時原告的名字是Mr. Broderip，他是A 所羅門有限公司的另一位債權人。 2. C. Mrs. Donoghue聲稱在薑啤中發現了一具腐爛的蝸牛遺骸。 3. B. 安東皮勒先生是1909年成立的安東皮勒KG公司(Anton Piller KG)的創始人。(有關該公司的歷史，包括皮勒先生本人的照片， 請參閱http：/www.piler.com/en-gb/Documents/578/piller-100-Years-en.pdf)。 4. D. 在引起此案的航行中，馬雷瓦號携帶了肥料。 5. C. 諾威治藥理公司成立於美國紐約州。 6. D. Mrs. Carlill感染了流感，而Carbolic Smokeball被稱是除了其他病之外，還用來防止流感的。 7. B. Mr. Woolmington被指控謀殺了他的妻子。 8. D. PJS的丈夫是一位著名的歌手。 9. D. American Cyanamid案涉及對人造可吸收外科縫綫專利的侵權索償，也即是一種外科産品的專利侵權。 10. C. 在High Trees House案中，雙方同意由於二戰的影響，當倫敦多達三分之一的人口離開城市時，將降低租金。
www.hk-lawyer.org 107 The University of Law - Hong Kong Campus
Campus Dean – full time, permanent Director of Programmes – full time, permanent Student and Campus Manager – full time, permanent Tutors/Senior Tutors – full/part time, permanent Visiting Lecturers – self-employed
Do you want to be part of our future?
Who are we? The University of Law (ULaw) is one of the UK’s largest law schools. With an impressive history going back to 1876, we employ over 700 staff and have over 9000 students studying on our undergraduate and postgraduate programmes, which are also delivered through our dedicated business schools in the UK and Berlin. ULaw has an outstanding reputation as a full service legal and educational training specialist, operating from thirteen campuses, with additional global reach through online and face to face provision.
Building on unprecedented growth and success across all areas of the portfolio, as recognised by our TEF Gold status, we continue to have exciting and ambitious plans for expansion and diversification.
What are we looking for? September 2019 will see the launch of our state of the art Campus in Hong Kong. Based in the heart of this thriving city, we are looking for the following, exceptional individuals to develop and deliver an outstanding student experience and mirror the same, high quality outcomes that are synonymous with the ULaw brand. We may be a new addition to the territory but you will be instrumental in establishing crucial, long-term relationships with the student body, legal firms and local businesses of Hong Kong.
Could this be you?
Campus Dean You will be a senior leader with significant experience of operating and leading in a commercial, educational or legal environment. You will have experience of motivating and developing a diverse team and delivering results across a complex operational portfolio, utilising the current UK strategy to grow a Hong Kong centre of excellence. You will have a demonstrable understanding and knowledge of the business and legal market place/legal education, coupled with a confident approach to building relationships, developing new business opportunities and maintaining strong links with stakeholder organisations and their leaders.
As Dean, you will contribute to the development of our programmes and strive to deliver the excellent student experience that we offer across all of our campuses.
Director of Programmes Reporting to the Campus Dean, you will be responsible for the quality and delivery of all programmes and courses at the Campus, including the co-ordination and production of the design and delivery of course materials and assessments. In liaison with the Dean, you will also manage the effective allocation of resources, in conjunction with a clear and transparent annual programme development plan that you will create. Supported by a Student and Campus Manager, you will be responsible for all delivery aspects of the student experience and the enhancement of student performance in the Campus overall.
Student and Campus Manager Reporting to the Dean and as part of the Executive Team, you will be responsible for implementing and managing efficient, high-quality operational processes and services at the Campus. This is a broad and varied role, encompasses both office/campus management and the full range of student support services. As such, you will need excellent customer service skills as well as facilities/building management experience, including relevant H&S legislation knowledge. A career history in the education sector would be highly desirable.
Tutors/Senior Tutors Reporting to the Dean, we are looking for an outstanding team of law tutors, ideally qualified solicitors or barristers who can demonstrate successful legal practice experience. You will enjoy being challenged (by students and course content in equal measure) and be able to adapt to the different and progressive learning styles of students and methods of course delivery. You will be eager to share your expertise and become involved in all aspects of enhancing the student experience within our campus, primarily teaching on our LPC, GDL and LLB programmes. Please note that classes are also routinely delivered over weekends and evenings and tutors are expected to work flexibly within these parameters.
Visiting Lecturers (VLs) To complement our permanent faculty, we are recruiting VLs in all areas of legal practice. Ideally, you will be a qualified lawyer/barrister with a genuine interest in the teaching profession – although previous teaching experience is not essential as training and support will be provided. We are looking for individuals who can demonstrate flexibility in the subjects that they teach, as you may be required to cover the full range of courses offered. Of equal importance is the requirement that you meet the exceptionally high standards of our existing faculty.
Please note that this is not a salaried position, you would be self-employed and remuneration rates will be discussed at interview.
Please visit our website www.law.ac.uk/vacancies for further details, including our generous list of benefits (for permanent staff) and how to apply. As our campus grows, we are also keen to receive applications from people who aspire to join us – other roles may be available so please do visit our vacancies section on a regular basis.
If you would like to arrange an informal discussion about the roles listed above, prior to application, contact Peter Crisp, PVC External, via email [email protected]
Closing date for applications: 12.00 midday, Friday 10th May Interviews: 20th & 22nd May – Director of Programmes, Student and Campus Manager 21st May – Campus Dean 23rd & 24th May - Tutors/Senior Tutors and VLs Location of interviews: Causeway Bay, Hong Kong (on the dates above only) OR London (dates TBC). Skype is also available
The University of Law is committed to the equality of opportunity but will require proof of the Right to Work in Hong Kong, for these roles. Reasonable relocation costs will be considered, if applicable. SPECIALISTS IN LEGAL RECRUITMENT
Meet the team Meet the largest legal specialist recruitment team in Hong Kong with unparalleled coverage across major corporates, international and leading local law firms, as well FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMERCIAL PRIVATE PRACTICE as financial services institutions on a global scale. Our consultants are strategically specialised in focusing on legal recruitment for different aspects of the job function and industry. We have successfully placed candidates across all levels from Associates and Junior Legal Counsels, to Partners and Heads of Legal. Get in touch to schedule a confidential appointment to discuss your career aspirations and hiring needs. Legal Manager / Counsel Senior Legal Manager Senior Construction Lawyer › 3+PQE › 3-5 PQE › Counsel / Partner on offer › International Insurance Business › Leading Listed Company (market cap 42 billions) › U K law firm Our client is looking for an experienced candidate with Our client is an industry leader within the manufacturing International practice specialised in advising in all prior insurance experience. This position will require you sector. You will be responsible for all legal and aspects of construction arbitration and litigation in Asia to assist the Head of Legal with providing commercial compliance matters for the Group. Our client is looking and worldwide. As a leading member of the team you advice to the business, as well as work closely with for an experienced corporate lawyer with exposure to will be required to provide mentorship and support to the Compliance team. The candidate should have listing compliance work. Fluency in spoken and written associates within the department and contribute to strong commercial acumen with fluency in English and English and Chinese (including Mandarin) is expected. the firm’s international arbitration network. The ideal Chinese. Ref: 4065209 Ref: 4051724 candidate will be a HK or UK qualified solicitor. Ref. 4061033
OLGA YUNG SERENA TANG MARTA VERDEROSA Head of Legal & Compliance Senior Legal Counsel, Litigation Dispute Resolution Associate Regional Director, Financial Services Director, In House Corporate Associate Director, Private Practice › 8+ PQE › 10 + PQE › 2-5 PQE [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] +852 2848 4791 +852 3412 4810 +852 2848 4794 › Established Buy Side House › Listed conglomerate › Top US Firm A well established financial services provider with SFC Our client is a listed conglomerate with operations Our client is looking for a mid-level lawyer with License Type 1, 4, 6, 9 is seeking for a Head of L&C. You across Financial and Technology, Media and Telecom prior litigation experience from leading international will report to the General Counsel who oversees Legal / (TMT) sectors. You will be reporting to the Associate law firms. Their team’s practice includes complex Compliance / Risk / Internal Audit. You will work closely General Counsel and handle dispute or litigation cases commercial litigations, dispute resolution, white collar with senior management team and oversee 2 compliance globally. The successful candidate will be Hong Kong and regulatory defence. The ideal candidate must have specialists. The role focuses largely on a variety of asset qualified and trained from large international law firms excellent Mandarin and English skills. HK qualification is management initiatives and IBD / securities matters. The or MNCs. Complete fluency in English and Chinese is preferred. Cravath scale is on offer. Ref. 4065649 ideal candidate will be a seasoned lawyer with fluency in essential. Ref: 4049448 English and Chinese.Ref: 4064956
Capital Markets Counsel APAC Legal Counsel Banking Associate › 6+ PQE › 6 + PQE › 3-5 PQE KAMIL BUTT TINA WANG SABINA LI › Leading Fintech Player › Reputable Retail Group › Top Tier International Firm Associate Manager, Financial Services Managing Consultant, In-House Corporate Senior Consultant, Legal Support A reputable fintech house with a strong platform is You will be a key member of the regional legal team, An international firm is now looking for a Hong Kong [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] seeking to take on two capital markets lawyers to drive reporting to the General Counsel, APAC and work in a qualified solicitor with at least 3 years of Banking & +852 2848 4798 +852 2848 9561 +852 3602 2480 their on-going and new deals. Reporting to the Head small team. The successful candidate must have solid Finance experience, to join a team of three. You’ll of Legal, you will focus on a variety of equity and debt experience in dealing with leasing matters in the region be exposed predominantly to leveraged finance and capital markets transactions. The ideal candidate will and able to work independently. Fluency in both English acquisition finance, but also to some PE work. Chinese have strong experience in driving capital markets deals. and Chinese languages is required. Ref: 4058922 language skills are not essential. Ref. 4062110 Both English and Chinese required. Ref: 4052491
Fund House Counsel Group Legal Counsel, Corporate Transactions Senior Associate – Conveyancing › 8+ PQE › 4 + PQE › 5+ PQE › Hedge Fund › Tech giant › Well-established Hong Kong Law Firm An established hedge fund with strong backing and As part of the group level legal function, you will be The firm has a current size of over 70 employees and the establishment is seeking for a seasoned lawyer to join involved in M&A transactions and various capital market role will involve working directly with the Partner with SORAYA TENNENT CHRYSTAL CHEUNG MATTHEW CHAU their new office in Hong Kong, and to work closely deals on a global scale. The successful candidate the support of 3-4 conveyancing executives. The team Senior Consultant, Legal Support Consultant, Legal Support Consultant, Private Practice with management team in building up the Hong Kong will be Hong Kong qualified, trained from leading law has very stable flow of business and this role is ideal for office. The ideal candidate will have prior hedge fund firms and familiar with HK listing compliance. Excellent mid-level conveyancing lawyers looking to progress to [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] experience. Ref: 4055573 communication skills and fluency in English and Chinese partnership. Ref: 4051816 +852 2848 4795 +852 2848 4792 +852 2848 4796 are essential. Ref: 4051750
Legal Counsel Legal Counsel Senior Lawyer - Corporate & Commercial › 2+PQE › 5-7 PQE › M&A › Family Office › Property developer › 5-10 PQE Operating in Hong Kong over 10 years, our client is Our client is a well-established property developer. Our client is an international law firm with a broad currently looking to recruit a sole legal representative You will be reporting to the Head of Legal and working client base including large EU headquartered industrial to oversee the region. The candidate needs to have alongside 3 lawyers, responding for all legal and groups. Reporting directly to the Managing Partner, strong commercial acumen, prior experience in dealing compliance matters for the property projects that the the new joiner will focus on growing the firm’s business BRIAN CHAN TOMAS HOWLETT ANGELA LAU with PE funds, and ability to manage senior investors. company is engaging in. The ideal candidate will be law services and network in Hong Kong and Asia. The The candidate can be qualified in any jurisdiction but experienced in real estate and corporate. Ref: 4058648 ideal candidate will possess at least 5 years’ PQE and Consultant, Private Practice Consultant, Legal Support Consultant, Private Practice Chinese language is a must. Ref. 4057007 experience in a broad variety of transactions. [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Ref 4017415 +852 2258 3546 +852 2848 4793 +852 2848 4797
To apply, visit www.michaelpage.com.hk quoting the reference number or contact our consultants.
Part of PageGroup Legal www.michaelpage.com.hk
16686_Hong_Kong_Lawyer_2019_May.indd All Pages 26/4/2019 10:51:58 AM SPECIALISTS IN LEGAL RECRUITMENT
Meet the team Meet the largest legal specialist recruitment team in Hong Kong with unparalleled coverage across major corporates, international and leading local law firms, as well FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMERCIAL PRIVATE PRACTICE as financial services institutions on a global scale. Our consultants are strategically specialised in focusing on legal recruitment for different aspects of the job function and industry. We have successfully placed candidates across all levels from Associates and Junior Legal Counsels, to Partners and Heads of Legal. Get in touch to schedule a confidential appointment to discuss your career aspirations and hiring needs. Legal Manager / Counsel Senior Legal Manager Senior Construction Lawyer › 3+PQE › 3-5 PQE › Counsel / Partner on offer › International Insurance Business › Leading Listed Company (market cap 42 billions) › U K law firm Our client is looking for an experienced candidate with Our client is an industry leader within the manufacturing International practice specialised in advising in all prior insurance experience. This position will require you sector. You will be responsible for all legal and aspects of construction arbitration and litigation in Asia to assist the Head of Legal with providing commercial compliance matters for the Group. Our client is looking and worldwide. As a leading member of the team you advice to the business, as well as work closely with for an experienced corporate lawyer with exposure to will be required to provide mentorship and support to the Compliance team. The candidate should have listing compliance work. Fluency in spoken and written associates within the department and contribute to strong commercial acumen with fluency in English and English and Chinese (including Mandarin) is expected. the firm’s international arbitration network. The ideal Chinese. Ref: 4065209 Ref: 4051724 candidate will be a HK or UK qualified solicitor. Ref. 4061033
OLGA YUNG SERENA TANG MARTA VERDEROSA Head of Legal & Compliance Senior Legal Counsel, Litigation Dispute Resolution Associate Regional Director, Financial Services Director, In House Corporate Associate Director, Private Practice › 8+ PQE › 10 + PQE › 2-5 PQE [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] +852 2848 4791 +852 3412 4810 +852 2848 4794 › Established Buy Side House › Listed conglomerate › Top US Firm A well established financial services provider with SFC Our client is a listed conglomerate with operations Our client is looking for a mid-level lawyer with License Type 1, 4, 6, 9 is seeking for a Head of L&C. You across Financial and Technology, Media and Telecom prior litigation experience from leading international will report to the General Counsel who oversees Legal / (TMT) sectors. You will be reporting to the Associate law firms. Their team’s practice includes complex Compliance / Risk / Internal Audit. You will work closely General Counsel and handle dispute or litigation cases commercial litigations, dispute resolution, white collar with senior management team and oversee 2 compliance globally. The successful candidate will be Hong Kong and regulatory defence. The ideal candidate must have specialists. The role focuses largely on a variety of asset qualified and trained from large international law firms excellent Mandarin and English skills. HK qualification is management initiatives and IBD / securities matters. The or MNCs. Complete fluency in English and Chinese is preferred. Cravath scale is on offer. Ref. 4065649 ideal candidate will be a seasoned lawyer with fluency in essential. Ref: 4049448 English and Chinese.Ref: 4064956
Capital Markets Counsel APAC Legal Counsel Banking Associate › 6+ PQE › 6 + PQE › 3-5 PQE KAMIL BUTT TINA WANG SABINA LI › Leading Fintech Player › Reputable Retail Group › Top Tier International Firm Associate Manager, Financial Services Managing Consultant, In-House Corporate Senior Consultant, Legal Support A reputable fintech house with a strong platform is You will be a key member of the regional legal team, An international firm is now looking for a Hong Kong [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] seeking to take on two capital markets lawyers to drive reporting to the General Counsel, APAC and work in a qualified solicitor with at least 3 years of Banking & +852 2848 4798 +852 2848 9561 +852 3602 2480 their on-going and new deals. Reporting to the Head small team. The successful candidate must have solid Finance experience, to join a team of three. You’ll of Legal, you will focus on a variety of equity and debt experience in dealing with leasing matters in the region be exposed predominantly to leveraged finance and capital markets transactions. The ideal candidate will and able to work independently. Fluency in both English acquisition finance, but also to some PE work. Chinese have strong experience in driving capital markets deals. and Chinese languages is required. Ref: 4058922 language skills are not essential. Ref. 4062110 Both English and Chinese required. Ref: 4052491
Fund House Counsel Group Legal Counsel, Corporate Transactions Senior Associate – Conveyancing › 8+ PQE › 4 + PQE › 5+ PQE › Hedge Fund › Tech giant › Well-established Hong Kong Law Firm An established hedge fund with strong backing and As part of the group level legal function, you will be The firm has a current size of over 70 employees and the establishment is seeking for a seasoned lawyer to join involved in M&A transactions and various capital market role will involve working directly with the Partner with SORAYA TENNENT CHRYSTAL CHEUNG MATTHEW CHAU their new office in Hong Kong, and to work closely deals on a global scale. The successful candidate the support of 3-4 conveyancing executives. The team Senior Consultant, Legal Support Consultant, Legal Support Consultant, Private Practice with management team in building up the Hong Kong will be Hong Kong qualified, trained from leading law has very stable flow of business and this role is ideal for office. The ideal candidate will have prior hedge fund firms and familiar with HK listing compliance. Excellent mid-level conveyancing lawyers looking to progress to [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] experience. Ref: 4055573 communication skills and fluency in English and Chinese partnership. Ref: 4051816 +852 2848 4795 +852 2848 4792 +852 2848 4796 are essential. Ref: 4051750
Legal Counsel Legal Counsel Senior Lawyer - Corporate & Commercial › 2+PQE › 5-7 PQE › M&A › Family Office › Property developer › 5-10 PQE Operating in Hong Kong over 10 years, our client is Our client is a well-established property developer. Our client is an international law firm with a broad currently looking to recruit a sole legal representative You will be reporting to the Head of Legal and working client base including large EU headquartered industrial to oversee the region. The candidate needs to have alongside 3 lawyers, responding for all legal and groups. Reporting directly to the Managing Partner, strong commercial acumen, prior experience in dealing compliance matters for the property projects that the the new joiner will focus on growing the firm’s business BRIAN CHAN TOMAS HOWLETT ANGELA LAU with PE funds, and ability to manage senior investors. company is engaging in. The ideal candidate will be law services and network in Hong Kong and Asia. The The candidate can be qualified in any jurisdiction but experienced in real estate and corporate. Ref: 4058648 ideal candidate will possess at least 5 years’ PQE and Consultant, Private Practice Consultant, Legal Support Consultant, Private Practice Chinese language is a must. Ref. 4057007 experience in a broad variety of transactions. [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Ref 4017415 +852 2258 3546 +852 2848 4793 +852 2848 4797
To apply, visit www.michaelpage.com.hk quoting the reference number or contact our consultants.
Part of PageGroup Legal www.michaelpage.com.hk
16686_Hong_Kong_Lawyer_2019_May.indd All Pages 26/4/2019 10:51:58 AM Private Practice In-house
Corporate Lawyers US Firm Hong Kong 1-7 PQE Legal Director Singapore 15+ PQE This dynamic and thriving US firm is expanding its corporate practice and seeks Hong Global IT and e-commerce services company seeks a senior legal counsel to join their Kong qualified lawyers from junior to mid-level who can handle both M&A and IPO team. The ideal lawyer should be admitted to a common law jurisdiction with corporate transactions. Fluency in Chinese is important. New York salary rates are on offer. experience working in the e-commerce or trade industry and familiarity with the laws (HKL 17465) across the ASEAN region. (HKL 17516)
Senior Legal Counsel (M&A/Commercial) Hong Kong 12-15 PQE Litigation Associates Hong Kong 1-7 PQE Established international entertainment business seeks a lawyer to lead complex A leading offshore firm with an established litigation practice is looking to continue to commercial transactions and handle a range of commercial work for the business. grow its team at various levels. Chinese language skills are preferred but not essential. Experience gained within an international corporation and/or international law firm, (HKL 17493) and proven team management skills are important. Excellent English and Chinese drafting skills is mandatory. (HKL 17128)
Senior Associate Singapore 4-6 PQE Global firm with strong regional presence is looking for a mid to senior level finance Asset Manager Hong Kong 10-15 PQE associate to join their practice. The ideal candidate should be qualified in Singapore with Institutional arm of leading asset manager seeks a senior lawyer with Asia Pac asset strong banking finance transactional experience. (HKL 17518) management experience for its Hong Kong office. Knowledge of both the Hong Kong and Singapore regulatory environment would be very helpful. Fluent Mandarin is critical for this role. (HKL 17386)
FCPA Associate Hong Kong 2-4 PQE A leading international firm is looking for a mid-level associate with FCPA and Hong Kong 10-15 PQE investigations experience. Experience gained with a leading practice is required. Funds Chinese language skills are essential. (HKL 17364) Senior lawyer with authorised funds and some knowledge of the MPF and SFC codes, rules and regulations sought by this well-known asset manager. Lawyers from either private practice or in-house will be considered for this role. Proficiency in Chinese is important. (HKL 17422) Commercial Litigation Hong Kong 2-4 PQE Well established city firm’s Hong Kong commercial litigation practice seeks a junior to mid-level lawyer to handle a range of contentious work. Some regulatory and Technology Company Hong Kong 5-10 PQE arbitration experience would be very helpful. Hong Kong admission and Chinese Exciting opportunity to join a newly formed group of an MNC that is looking for a mid to language skills are helpful but not a pre-requisite. (HKL 17509) senior level lawyer who is passionate about and interested in the technology sector. You will need general commercial and corporate skills but have had some exposure to companies investing in new technologies. (HKL 17532)
Funds Hong Kong 1-4 PQE International law firm seeks a junior funds associate to join its dynamic team. The work will involve a mix of regulatory and fund formation work acting for both hedge funds and Insurance Legal Counsel Hong Kong 4-8 PQE private equity houses. Overseas lawyers will be considered. No language skills required. Large MNC consulting firm seeks a mid-level lawyer with some experience in non- (HKL 17464) contentious insurance work gained in-house or with a law firm. No language skills required. Good commercial outlook and problem solving skills important. (HKL 17529)
Asset Finance Hong Kong 1-4 PQE A leading law firm seeks a junior asset finance associate to join their transportation Head of Compliance Hong Kong Senior team. You will support a range of clients across a wide range of asset-classes. International law firm is looking for a lawyer to be its head of compliance to support the Transportation sector experience is a plus but not essential. English and Mandarin firm across Asia Pacific. Knowledge of conflict rules is important as well as being able to language skills are essential. (HKL 17409) provide quick practical and commercial advice across the region. (HKL 17535)
Andrew Skinner Georgeanna Mok Jamie Milne Krystina Schippers +852 2920 9100 +852 2920 9101 +852 2920 9112 +852 2920 9113 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] London Hong Kong Singapore New York Berlin
Pure leaders. Shaping tomorrow.
Pure are experts in search and recruitment. We find the next leaders for businesses across the globe. Our specialist Legal Private Practice team identifies, engages and introduces legal talent, placing exceptional people in remarkable roles. Our broad spectrum of clients encompasses leading international, US, Hong Kong and Offshore law firms.
For a confidential discussion regarding the private practice market, please contact one of our dedicated consultants:
Sonia Taylor Pure, Unit 6109 The Center Legal 99 Queen’s Road Central [email protected] Hong Kong T +852 2499 1611 Michelle Hu Legal (Greater China) [email protected] puresearch.com