OLN
在2021年4月的《亚洲法律业务》中，OLN再次被授予“ ALB首选雇主”，被认可为亚洲律师事务所最佳雇主之一。这是OLN连续第三年成功取得这一认可，并总共获得了该奖项四次。本行要感谢员工在过去一年中纵使受到COVID-19的干扰仍努力不懈，并且在过去的几年中为本行争取到成为ALB亚洲最佳雇主。
ALB 2021年亚洲最佳雇主选举问卷调查向所有员工开放，从管理合伙人到律师助理以至非法律相关员工。优胜者是根据受访者的数量和质量选出的，有来自八个亚洲司法管辖区的1800多名受访者。有关更多详细信息，请点击此处阅读《亚洲法律业务》报告。
作者：梁泳泽律师及伍洁愉律师
(本文章发表于2021年4月的《香港律师》杂志上：http://www.hk-lawyer.org/sites/default/files/e-magazines/HKL-APR-2021/viewer/desktop/index.html?doc=05D3B64F4883E4B7B372AA907090C1D6#page/40)
在《关于内地与香港特别行政区法院就仲裁程序相互协助保全的安排》（《安排》）下，以香港为仲裁地的做法可向内地法院申请保全措施以支持有关仲裁，可谓一项重大突破。因此，有人认为《安排》将“改变游戏规则”，为选择香港作为与中国有关争议的中立仲裁地，提供了无可比拟的优势。
事实是，内地法院一般并非由败诉方支付诉讼费。而香港仲裁方是否可以在仲裁中向另一方取得根据《安排》于内地法院获取保全的费用，则是一个值得探讨的问题。事实上，中国内地并非唯一方案由诉讼方各自承担诉讼费的司法管辖区。更广的问题或许是，当附带法庭程序诉讼的诉讼费原则是“由诉讼方各自承担诉讼费”时，是否可在仲裁中追讨向相关法庭申请保全的费用。
本文将深入探讨此事后追讨诉讼费的争议。虽然来自普通法适用地区的仲裁争议可能欢迎这种诉讼费的申索，但仲裁庭在允许诉讼费申索时亦应小心谨慎地发挥其作用。因此，最简单的解决方案，则是在合约中加入适当的诉讼费弥偿条款。
争议
《仲裁的诉讼费和获得保全的费用》（《香港律师》，2020年9月）一文中，曾讨论过根据《安排》向内地法院申请保全后在仲裁中追讨相关费用的问题。该文认为，对比《 1996年英国仲裁法》（《英国仲裁法》）内部的“仲裁的诉讼费”所包括的“其他费用”可被广泛解释为涵盖附带的司法程序的费用，《仲裁条例》中并没有争议在法庭诉讼中申请临时措施所招致的费用，是否可以被视为仲裁诉讼费用的一部分并予以追讨。条款亦建议修改《安排》以使该些费用可在仲裁中追讨。
仲裁庭的司法权
《仲裁条例》第74（3）条规定，「任何任何一方要求作出命令或指示（包括临时措施），则仲裁庭也就该请求，行使其酌情决定权，命令一方支付费用（包括该仲裁庭的收费及开支）”（作者后加的体现）。虽然第74 （3）条没有特别说明该费用包括与仲裁有关的法院申请，但因为《仲裁条例》第74（1）条已列明仲裁庭有权在判决内对仲裁程序的费用作指示，如第74 （3）条被理解为不包括法庭申请，第74（3）条实属多余。认为第74（3）条宽广的措词，它可说是已涵盖向法庭申请临时措施的费用。
就《计划》而言，第三条已假设假设仲裁庭机构将参与内部地法院的保全申请。例如，在仲裁机构副本分段的仲裁案件后，保全申请应由该机构转递。因此，结合上述第74（ 1）条和第74（3）条，仲裁庭应具有承认权，就应当提出申请保全的费用作出裁决（而内地法院的费用将归入上述第三条)。
無論如何，大多數機構和臨時仲裁的規則（例如2018年《香港國際仲裁中心管理仲裁規則》第34.1條；《國際商會仲裁規則》（2021年）第38條；《貿易法委員會仲裁規則》（2013年）第40(2)條），均將「其他費用」包括在「仲裁的訟費」之中。如《英國仲裁法》中的「其他費用」一詞可被廣泛地解釋為涵蓋附帶法庭程序招致的費用，則仲裁庭亦應根據各仲裁規則對追討此類費用有管轄權。
行使管轄權
即使根據《仲裁條例》第74條及／或各仲裁規則，香港的仲裁庭可能有管轄權容許追討附帶法庭程序的費用，但這並不等於仲裁庭應該行使這個管轄權。實際上，此管轄權似乎只應在極少數情況下才行使，尤其是如果預設的訟費規則無法以合同方式約定豁免。
須謹記，仲裁庭的管轄權源自仲裁協議。若當事人未能把預設的訟費規則以合同豁免，仲裁庭亦應慎重地行使其從當事人獲得的訟費管轄權去達至同樣效果。否則，仲裁裁決可能會根據《仲裁條例》第81條被撤銷，或因違反公共政策而無法執行(Ralli Brothers v Compañia Naviera Sota Y Aznar [1920] 2 K.B. 287; Ryder Industries Ltd v Chan Shui Woo [2016] 1 HKC 323)。
以律师费弥偿作为解决方案
在没有修例变更法庭程序的法定诉讼费规则，而又不限制法庭对诉讼费行使司法酌情权，更不以合约豁免基线的诉讼费规则的情况下，最简单可以全数追讨法律费用（当然是仲裁或法院程序中产生）的方法可能是在合约中加入能反映对准立场的主张费弥偿条款。庭判决诉讼费的权力，除非受“不容反悔”或既判原则所排除，否则可以强制执行诉讼费弥偿条款（Cervo v Kingsleys Pty Ltd [2018] ACTSC 179)。
在Abigroup Limited诉Sandtara Pty Limited [2002] NSWCA 45一案中，新南威尔斯上诉法院维持地方法院的判决，确认了另一法院在主要诉讼程序中仅判给了诉讼各方对评判基准的诉讼费，原告其余合约权利在新的诉讼中，根据合约弥偿条款追讨律师与委托人基准的诉讼费与诉讼各方对评标的诉讼费之间的差额。上诉法院亦裁定，此等在地方法院进行的后继申索并不完全违反“不容反悔”原则，也非滥用法庭程序。
一般而言，法院就诉讼费诉讼费行使酌情权时如未有处理诉讼费弥偿的替代的话，随后的诉讼费弥偿申索均不会构成既定事项或被排除执行。费的合约规定，也不会因该诉讼的诉讼费命令与合约规定重新而被废止（Vertzayias v King＆Ors [2011] NSWCA 215)。
话虽如此，但在随后的诉讼中是否无法执行诉讼费弥偿，应视乎每宗案件的情况而定。 （Cervo v Kingsleys Pty Ltd [2018] ACTSC 179)。
结论
即使当地法院的法定诉讼费规则是由所有人共同承担诉讼费，来自普通法适用地区的仲裁界在习惯了“诉讼费视乎诉讼结果而定”下，替代“全数追讨”与仲裁有关的费用的是可以理解的。费率权。在不限制法庭裁决诉讼费率权力的情况下，应考虑加插适当的诉讼费弥偿条款，以反映合约方根据各自独立利益而达成之辩护费安排。
致谢
作者希望感谢戴均豪（高李严律师事务所实习律师）的研究帮助。
作者: 叶琳宝律师
在这个COVID-19时代，一些过去曾经易于处理的商业惯例已变得难以实行，包括召开周年成员大会（「周年大会」）。香港的公司必须确保周年大会要遵守《公司条例》（《香港法例》第622章），而且要遵守公共卫生条例。
根据于2020年3月29日生效的香港法例第599G章《预防及控制疾病（禁止群组聚集）规例》，该条例禁止群组在任何香港的「公众地方」聚集。但是，该条例豁免「任何团体的会议，前提是该会议须在指明期间内举行，以遵守任何条例或符合规管该团体的运作或事务的其他规管性质文书的群组聚集」。该豁免适用于公司的周年大会。在本文中，我们根据《预防及控制疾病（禁止群组聚集）规例》以及《公司条例》，讨论上市公司和私人公司中如何举行周年大会。
私人公司
实体会议
为了保障公众健康，公司应尽可能限制股东出席周年大会，并采取预防措施以保持社交距离。
如《预防及控制疾病（禁止群组聚集）规例》附表1第11段所述，如果有超过20人参加周年大会，公司必须采取措施将股东分隔在不同房间或区隔范围中，并且每个房间或范围容纳不多于20人。
为了更好地管理参加会议的股东人数，如果股东希望亲自出席会议，公司可以考虑要求股东进行预先注册。公司还可以鼓励股东在会议之前以书面形式向管理层提出问题。
虚拟会议/混合式会议
随着科技的进步，《公司条例》引入了一项条款，准许公司在周年大会使用科技。
根据《公司条例》第584（1）条规定，公司可使用令该公司身处不同地方的成员能够在大会上聆听、发言及表决的任何科技，在2个或多于2个地方举行成员大会。这可以使不在同一地点的股东能够聆听，发言和表决。
根据《公司条例》第576条的规定，如果公司要在2个或以上地点举行会议，则必须在会议通知中列出周年大会的主要地点和其他地点。
但是，召开虚拟会议/混合式会议亦必须遵循法定人数和其他法定要求，以使股东在会议做出的决定为有效。
此外，股东必须能够在虚拟周年大会上投票。公司应建立一种股东投票的机制，如通过视频会议举手或通过电话进行口头答复。
或者，一些公司通过混合会议的方式召开周年大会，即该会议既可以在实际地点又可以通过电子方式举行。股东可以选择亲自出席或以虚拟方式出席会议。
请注意，如果公司打算举行虚拟会议/混合会议，则公司须核对其章程或任何股东协议，以检查是否有任何规定要求周年大会上要有实际股东的存在。
书面决议
此外，公司除了举行实体会议外，还可以考虑使用书面决议。根据《公司条例》第548条，除在其任期结束前罢免审计师或董事的例外情况外，公司可以向股东传阅书面决议。根据《公司条例》第556条，所有有资格对该决议案进行表决的股东均已签署，则该决议案获得通过。如要采用书面决议而不是实体会议，应在有限数目的股东或董事且可以预见没有异议的情况下使用。
上市公司
实体会议
证券及期货事务监察委员会（「证监会」）及香港联合交易所有限公司（「联交所」）根据《预防及控制疾病（禁止群组聚集）规例》于2020年4月1日发表《联合声明》，阐明上市公司举行股东大会的职责。
根据《联合声明》，所有股东大会，包括（i）《公司条例》和/或《主板上市规则》或《创业板上市规则》规定的股东周年大会； （ii）除《预防及控制疾病（禁止群组聚集）规例》外，香港上市公司的股东特别大会通常属例外。
实际技巧
(1) 与股东沟通：公司应提醒股东在公司网站上注意股东周年大会的安排。
(2) 给股东充足的时间送回代理委托书：如果股东不亲自出席会议，则股东可以在会议前以代理委托书进行投票。
(3) 让股东提出问题：公司应在召开会议前为股东提供以书面或电子形式向管理层提出问题的渠道，以便未能出席会议的股东仍有机会提出问题。
(4) 召开实体会议的安排：如果公司决定举行实体周年大会，则公司应缩短演示文稿或将其发布在公司网站上。如果需要休会，公司应准备会议的文稿，并提前计划休会期限，并在必要时将休会或推迟通知发给股东。此外，公司不应提供茶点。公司应确保在周年大会的场馆有消毒和其他防疫安排。
(5) 制定虚拟会议的指引：为了促进虚拟会议能顺利进行，公司应为股东准备有关虚拟会议中可能会遇到的一些实际问题的指引，例如股东在失去连接后，如何可以重新参加会议和股东应怎样投票，例如按下按钮或举手示意等，并准备任何应急计划，以防遇到技术困难。
我们预计虚拟会议在COVID-19之后的时代会继续盛行。我们建议公司应仔细计划举行股东周年大会有关措施，以符合《公司条例》和《预防及控制疾病（禁止群组聚集）规例》的规定。
If you have obtained a decision in your favour in an overseas jurisdiction against a Hong Kong company or individual, the key question for you would be whether or not this judgment can be enforced in Hong Kong.
A court decision cannot be enforced overseas without first being recognised by the relevant countries concerned, and Hong Kong is no exception to this principle.
French courts are issuing an increasing number of decisions against non-French companies, including many registered in Hong Kong. According to French law, to enforce a judgment by a French court in an overseas jurisdiction, there is an obligation to comply with the ‘Exequatur procedure,’ and this procedure may vary depending on the overseas jurisdictions involved.
Enforcement in Hong Kong
The enforcement of French or other foreign judgments can be obtained in two ways: either registering the decision with the Court of First Instance or bringing a new legal action.
As far as France is concerned, the exequatur procedure that must be followed is the former – registering the decision with the Court of First Instance. There is no need to bring new legal action and start the whole process from the beginning again.
When you have obtained a conviction against a Hong Kong company, the core considerations before moving forward are the following:
1. Is the defendant solvent in Hong Kong?
2. Is the judgment final?
3. Does the decision order payment of monetary damages?
If the answers to these three questions are affirmative, you can then consider the next steps to take.
Once the defendant’s solvency in Hong Kong is established, it is possible to proceed with the registration procedure, which is provided for in the Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act Cap 319. This text enables the enforcement of foreign judgments by registering decisions from superior courts in designated countries with reciprocal arrangements with Hong Kong. These designated countries include Australia, Bermuda, Brunei, India, Malaysia, New Zealand, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Austria, the Netherlands, and Israel.
Under these provisions, the beneficiary of a French court’s decision may apply to the Court of First Instance in Hong Kong for registration.
Here are some of the conditions to be met (this list is not exhaustive):
• the decision must relate to the payment of a sum of money;
• the decision must be final and not subject to appeal;
• the decision must be issued by a civil or commercial court; and
• the application must be filed within six years of the final decision from the foreign jurisdiction.
Once the decision is registered in Hong Kong, a notification will be served to the defendant, and the decision can be enforced in the same way as the decisions by local courts.
Security for Costs
A critical specificity in Hong Kong, is that the local court can ask the plaintiff seeking enforcement for security in the form of a deposit. It is well-established in Hong Kong that a foreign plaintiff may be ordered to deposit a sum in court, known as the ‘Security for costs’ when starting legal proceedings.
The security for costs aims to cover part of the defendant’s estimated litigation costs in defending an action brought by a foreign plaintiff. When the defendant successfully defends the action, the amount of its legal costs that normally would be payable by the foreign plaintiff, would be secured by the security for costs.
Therefore, depending on the amounts involved, this can act as a deterrent for overseas plaintiffs as they may not want to have a significant financial sum locked up in Hong Kong.
As mentioned above, this procedure of registration at the Court of First Instance is only available for a specific list of countries (including France). Therefore, for other jurisdictions you should always check if the jurisdiction issuing the decision to be enforced in Hong Kong is also on this list. If not, the possibility of bringing a new legal action based on the foreign judgment remains open.
No Requirement for Reciprocity
This procedure is possible even if the decision does not emanate from a common-law jurisdiction as there is no requirement for reciprocity. A decision rendered by a court in a jurisdiction that does not recognize a judgment made by a Hong Kong court may still be enforced in Hong Kong if all the conditions are met.
Should you wish to enforce a foreign decision in Hong Kong, and more specifically a decision issued by a French judge, it is highly recommended to contact a Hong Kong lawyer to discuss the best way forward.
The general principles in determining whether a trade mark can be registered in China are to a large extent the same as in most other countries, considering China is also one of many jurisdictions in the WIPO Madrid International Registration system. Indistinctive or descriptive marks which fail to achieve registration in the European Union will probably have no chance of registration in China. Yet it does not mean that trade marks which are clearly distinctive and registered in most places around the world will naturally be accepted for registration in China because certain technical or special grounds can withhold registration, putting aside the relative ground due to existence of prior similar marks.
For example, a mark will likely have its registration declined in China if it comprises a country name or any foreign geographical name widely known to the public. During the course of substantive examination, the Examiner may not look at every aspect to find out if the relevant name has any other meanings or references in the whole context of the mark. Upon refusal, the Applicant will have to resort to the review process to explain and justify that the mark in its entirety can satisfy the requirements for registration.
There are 3 scenarios where a mark comprising a geographical name may be registered: –
Marie France Van Damme
Fashion designer Marie France Van Damme uses her own personal name for branding purposes and has been trading under the mark 
. However, this was initially declined for registration in Class 25 for “clothing” in China because of the word “FRANCE” within the trade mark. Ms Van Damme succeeded in the review by convincing the review adjudicator that the word “France” is generally perceived by consumers, in the context of her brand, as the name of a living person instead of referring to the country of France.
URAL
The mark 
was initially declined for registration in Class 9 for “loudspeakers” in China because of the word “URAL” in the mark being associated with the Ural Mountains located along the East European and West Siberian plains. The applicant succeeded in the review by convincing the review adjudicator that the word “URAL” can also be a surname and a specie of owl. The evidence of pre-application use of the mark by the extensive sales of the goods in China might have supported this case. However, as it is not expressly entered as a condition of registration in China whether or not a mark has been granted based on acquired distinctiveness through use, such unreported precedent gives us a useful hint or guidance that this approach can work in some cases.
Car And Driver
Suggestive marks are often just categorically seen as descriptive marks in China. The application for 
was initially declined registration in Class 4 for ‘fuels’ as the words ‘CAR’ and “DRIVER” seem closely associated with the products of “fuels” for automobiles but if we look at these words more carefully, they are not directly connected to the essential characteristics and functions of the goods. The Applicant succeeded in the review by convincing the review adjudicator that the mark as a whole is not directly descriptive of the goods sought to be registered and it is capable of functioning as a trade mark to indicate the source of origin of the goods.
China has a tremendously high number of trade mark applications filed on a daily basis. We just need to bear with a reasonable degree of discrepancy, fluctuation and inconsistency between different examiners in assessing the inherent registrability of a trade mark. The good news is we can always rely on the review mechanism to share our views and analysis with the more senior examiners to reassess whether a mark, which is usually unique on its own, can satisfy the requirements for registration as laid down in the Trade Mark Law. We are seeing good progress as China becomes more aligned with rest of the world in the administration of the trade mark regime.
Managing and administering an estate may be a complex matter and most people are unsure even where to begin. It is hard enough to accept the loss of a loved one. The last thing we want to do is to hurry about in search of key papers and statements, as well as information as to the proper process to handle the estate of your loved one. We see every day the stress this incurs. Here we summarise the usual procedures for obtaining Probate to validate the will and administer an estate. Hopefully this step-by-step guide can act as a starting point which could make this process simpler and more manageable.
After the death you should first register such at the registrar of births and deaths and obtain a death certificate. You will need to produce a medical certificate of the cause of death to obtain the death certificate.
After the death certificate has been obtained, you may begin making funeral arrangements.
If there is a will (as further explained below), it is the responsibility of the person named therein as executor(s) to arrange for the funeral. It is possible that the deceased may have indicated his/her wishes in the will as to their preference for burial or cremation. The executor should take into account such wishes when making funeral arrangements.
The expenses incurred in arranging the funeral and disposal of the body is payable from the deceased’s estate. However, it is usually not permitted to deal with the deceased’s assets at this early stage as a has not been obtained from the Probate Registry. Therefore, in practice, the family members of the deceased will pay for such expenses and be reimbursed from the estate after a grant of representation is obtained.
You should check carefully to see whether the deceased made a will and if there is a will, whether it is the latest will or if it has been subsequently revoked. (This step can be taken earlier so that the deceased’s family members will know whether there is an executor to handle the funeral arrangements.)
You could start by checking the personal documents of the deceased and/or enquiring with the deceased’s other family members. Often, you will also have to check the deceased’s safe deposit box.
To gain access to the safe deposit box, the following individual could make an application to the Director of Home Affairs for a Certificate for Necessity of Inspection of Bank Deposit Box:
After the certificate of inspection is obtained, the holder of the certificate should make an appointment with the Secretary for Home Affairs and the bank for inspection of the safe deposit box.
If a will is found in the safe deposit box and the holder of the inspection certificate is named as the executor under the will or the holder is the surviving renter of the safe deposit box, the holder can remove the will after taking a copy and returning the copy to the safe deposit box. The holder should also make an inventory of the contents in the safe deposit box.
If there is no will found or if there is a will but i) the holder of the inspection certificate is not the executor, or ii) there is no executor appointed in the will and the holder is not the surviving renter of the safe deposit box, the bank staff should immediately close the safe deposit box after obtaining a copy of the will (if any) and giving the copy to the public officers.
It should be noted that you should not remove any item, save and except a will (if possible), from the safe deposit box during inspection.
Thereafter, it is usually necessary to obtain a grant of representation in order to deal with the deceased’s assets.
If the deceased passed away with a will appointing an executor, the executor should apply for a Grant of Probate. If the deceased passed away without a valid will (e.g. no will was found or the will has been revoked), persons entitled e.g. wife, children should apply for a Grant of Letters of Administration.
The application for a grant is made to the Probate Registry of the High Court using specific forms supported by relevant documents, including:-
After making the application, the Probate Registry may raise requisitions on the application to obtain further information or seek clarification. If the Probate Registry is satisfied with your answers to the requisitions, the grant will be issued.
After the grant of representation is obtained, the personal representative of the estate (i.e. the executor under the will or the administrator appointed if there is no will) will first need to collect the assets of the deceased under the estate and then make payment of the deceased’s debts, funeral and other expenses in relation to the estate. Thereafter, the estate may be distributed accordingly.
If there is no valid will, the administrator should distribute the estate in accordance with the Intestates’ Estates Ordinance. The order of entitlement depends on the relationship of the surviving relative with the deceased. (It should be noted that the rule of intestacy only benefits people who have direct blood relations with the deceased and does not benefit unmarried partners, step-children (unless legally adopted) and in-laws.
For example, if the deceased leaves a widow/widower only but leaves no children, parents or other close relatives, then the surviving spouse is entitled to the whole of the deceased’s residuary estate. Another example is where the deceased leaves a spouse and a child, the surviving spouse is entitled to all of the deceased’s personal chattels, and a sum of HK$500,000 from the residuary estate, thereafter, if there is any remaining asset, it would be divided in half and distributed equally between the surviving spouse and the child of the deceased.
On the other hand, if there is a valid will, the executor should distribute the estate in accordance with the deceased’s wishes under the will. In the event that there is partial intestacy (i.e. where there is a will which does not completely dispose of the deceased’s assets), the Intestates’ Estates Ordinance will govern the distribution of those undisposed assets.
The above is only a brief summary of the process of handling one’s post-death matters and dealing with the deceased’s estate. In reality, complications may arise in any stage of obtaining probate and administering the estate. If you have any questions regarding the above or would like to obtain further information on our probate and estate planning services, please contact one of the members of our Probate and Estate Planning team.
This article is for information purposes only. Its contents do not constitute legal advice and readers should not regard this article as a substitute for detailed advice in individual instances.
March 2021
香港中环雪厂街二号圣佐治大厦五楼503室
+852 2868 0696
