• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
location icon香港中环雪厂街二号圣佐治大厦五楼503室phone-icon +852 2868 0696 linkedintwitterfacebook
OLN IP Services
close-btn
OLN IP Services
Get bespoke and commercially-driven advice to your Intellectual Property
Learn More
OLN IP Services
OLN Online
close-btn
OLN Online
Powered by Oldham, Li & Nie, the law firm of choice for Hong Kong’s vibrant startup and SME community, OLN Online is a forward-looking and seamless addition to traditional legal services – a true disruptor.
Learn More
OLN IP Services
  • 简
    • ENG
    • 繁
    • FR
    • 日本語
Oldham, Li & Nie
OLN IP Services
close-btn
OLN IP Services
Get bespoke and commercially-driven advice to your Intellectual Property
Learn More
OLN IP Services
OLN Online
close-btn
OLN Online
Powered by Oldham, Li & Nie, the law firm of choice for Hong Kong’s vibrant startup and SME community, OLN Online is a forward-looking and seamless addition to traditional legal services – a true disruptor.
Learn More
OLN IP Services
  • 关于
        • 奖项与排名
        • 企业社会责任
  • 专业服务
        • 加拿大公证服务
        • 中国事务
        • 破产法
        • 人身伤害法
        • Startups & Venture Capital
        • 中国委托公证服务
        • 争议解决
        • 公司和商业法
        • 家事法
        • 保险
        • 私人客户 – 遗产规划和遗嘱认证
        • 税务咨询部
        • 投资基金
        • 长者法律服务
        • 商业诈骗和资产追踪
        • 法国事务
        • 知识产权法
        • 日本事务
        • 合规、调查和执法
        • 公证服务
        • 金融服务监管部
        • 加拿大公证服务
        • 中国事务
        • 公司和商业法
        • 商业诈骗和资产追踪
        • 争议解决
        • 香港雇佣法和商业移民法律服务
        • 家事法
        • 法国事务
        • 投资基金
        • 破产法
        • 保险
        • 知识产权法
        • 公证服务
        • 人身伤害法
        • 私人客户 – 遗产规划和遗嘱认证
        • 金融服务监管部
        • Startups & Venture Capital
        • 税务咨询部
        • 日本事务
        • 长者法律服务
        • 合规、调查和执法
        • 中国委托公证服务
        • 香港雇佣法和商业移民法律服务
  • 律師團隊
  • 最新消息
  • 办事处

Suite 503, St. George's Building,
2 Ice House Street, Central, Hong Kong

Tel. +852 2868 0696 | Send Email
linkedin twitter facebook
OLN Blue

OLN

  • Block Content Examples
  • Client Information & Registration
  • Contact Us
  • Cookie Policy (EU)
  • Globalaw
  • OLN Podcasts
  • Privacy Policy
  • Review
  • Test Blog
  • 专业服务
  • 关于我们
  • 办事处
  • 加入我们
  • 律師團隊
  • 我们的历史
    • 奖项与排名
    • 高李严律师行的企业社会责任
  • 所获奖项
  • 标准服务条款
  • 联系我们
  • 评价
  • 评语
  • 高李严律师事务所和社区
  • 高李严律师行
  • 关于
        • 奖项与排名
        • 企业社会责任
  • 专业服务
        • 加拿大公证服务
        • 中国事务
        • 破产法
        • 人身伤害法
        • Startups & Venture Capital
        • 中国委托公证服务
        • 争议解决
        • 公司和商业法
        • 家事法
        • 保险
        • 私人客户 – 遗产规划和遗嘱认证
        • 税务咨询部
        • 投资基金
        • 长者法律服务
        • 商业诈骗和资产追踪
        • 法国事务
        • 知识产权法
        • 日本事务
        • 合规、调查和执法
        • 公证服务
        • 金融服务监管部
        • 加拿大公证服务
        • 中国事务
        • 公司和商业法
        • 商业诈骗和资产追踪
        • 争议解决
        • 香港雇佣法和商业移民法律服务
        • 家事法
        • 法国事务
        • 投资基金
        • 破产法
        • 保险
        • 知识产权法
        • 公证服务
        • 人身伤害法
        • 私人客户 – 遗产规划和遗嘱认证
        • 金融服务监管部
        • Startups & Venture Capital
        • 税务咨询部
        • 日本事务
        • 长者法律服务
        • 合规、调查和执法
        • 中国委托公证服务
        • 香港雇佣法和商业移民法律服务
  • 律師團隊
  • 最新消息
  • 办事处

SPAC or Not To SPAC: An Alternative Route to Go Public Without an IPO (II)

OLN Marketing

SPAC or Not To SPAC: An Alternative Route to Go Public Without an IPO (II)

November 16, 2020 by OLN Marketing

In Part I of this article, we have examined the history of SPACs, let’s now turn to examine what investors get from investing in a SPAC, what SPACs do with the money raised and what the future looks for SPACs.

What are investors investing in and what do they get?

In a typical SPAC IPO, the SPAC is a newly incorporated company and does not have any operating history, financials nor performance record. What do investors base their investment decisions on then? In traditional IPOs, the listing vehicle will have operating history and a particular operating business, whether or not the company has been operating in profit in the past is not necessarily a key criterion depending on where the company proposes to list its shares. The company will need to disclose in the prospectus matters such as its business, financial performance, risks involved so that potential investors will be able to have an understanding of how good or bad the company has been performing and assess its future prospects before making an investment decision. 

For a SPAC, no such information is available to investors as the SPAC is only a shell company. What they have, on the other hand, is a management team and an investment team typically with experiences in specific industries or sectors which the SPAC intends to acquire potential targets with capital raised from the IPO. Further, in a SPAC prospectus, there is no information on any potential targets of business combination or acquisition because stating the potential target would mean information on the target will be required to be disclosed as in any traditional IPO of companies with operating history. Hence, what investors invest in is not any specific operating company but rather their trust and confidence in the management team and investment team of the SPAC and their experiences in finding a most suitable target for business combination, merger or acquisition and bring it public.  

In return for their investment, investors receive units of the SPACs, with each unit comprising a share of common stock and a fraction of a warrant to purchase a share of common stock after completion of the de-SPAC transaction. Shareholders are generally given the right to approve or reject any proposed de-SPAC transaction. The SPAC will provide its shareholders with the opportunity to redeem their shares upon the completion of the de-SPAC transaction either (i) in a shareholder meeting called to approve the proposed de-SPAC transaction or (ii) by means of a tender offer. Whether the SPAC will seek shareholders’ approval of a proposed de-SPAC transaction or conduct a tender offer will be made by the SPAC at its sole discretion taking into account factors such as the timing of the transaction and whether the terms of the transaction would require the SPAC to seek shareholders’ approval by law or pursuant to regulatory requirements. Upon a de-SPAC transaction, shareholders can choose to maintain their investment in the newly acquired or merged company or redeem their shares.

What do SPACs do with all the moneys raised?

The capital raised by SPACs through IPOs are held in a trust. Usually, after setting aside some portions of the funds to meet the listing expenses, underwriting commission and the SPACs’ ongoing operational costs, the remaining IPO proceeds are segregated in a trust account with a third-party financial institution. The funds can only be used for the post-IPO business combination, merger with or acquisition of a target business or for the redemption of the SPAC shares upon request by the shareholders. If the business combination, acquisition cannot be achieved within the specified timeframe, i.e. 18 – 24 months after the SPAC IPO, the SPAC shall be liquidated and the funds returned to the shareholders to redeem their shares in the SPAC. 

Since SPAC shareholders have the right to request the SPAC to redeem their shares, the SPAC shall redeem the shares with the funds set aside in the trust account upon receiving such request. A huge number of shareholders requesting redemption of SPAC shares means that a large portion of the funds in the trust account will be required to be paid out as redemption money, which the trust account may end up not having sufficient funds left to consummate any de-SPAC transaction. If the SPAC fails to raise additional financing for the de-SPAC transaction, it may end up not being able to complete the business combination, acquisition within the timeframe which will then lead to the liquidation of the SPAC.

 Future of SPACs?

Not knowing how much longer the COVID-19 pandemic will continue to affect our daily lives and the economy, particularly with the second, third or fourth wave hitting different parts of the world one after another and the record breaking high of daily new cases, it is difficult to predict market reaction to traditional IPOs and investors tend to adopt more conservative approaches in making investment decisions. While there are big name IPOs which the general public has been waiting for and current economic environment is not expected to have significant negative impact on their subscriptions, other small to mid-size IPOs are nonetheless going to be the hardest hit. Instead of going through the lengthy and costly IPO process and not knowing how well-received by the public their shares will be, a business combination, merger with or an acquisition by a SPAC would seem to be the more realistic way of exit of private companies. With the ever-growing number of SPAC IPOs and the funds raised through them, we can only expect to see the continuous thrive of SPACs at least during this period of uncertainty.

Disclaimer: Nothing in this article is meant to be or shall be construed as any legal advice on Hong Kong, US or the laws of any other jurisdictions referred to in this article or as any legal advice on SPACs to any person.

December 2020

Filed Under: 公司和商业法

跨境资产追索综合计划

November 11, 2020 by OLN Marketing

如何连接各地的追索和执行行动
 

离岸公司越来越多地被用作资产保护的工具,令贷方的债务追收和资产追回行动更具挑战性。 如果发现目标资产是由离岸公司(如果借款人来自国内或香港,很可能是英属维京群岛公司)持有的,贷方很多时候会停止执法程序。 本文旨在为贷款人就如何计划跨境行动以最大程度地提高回收率提供实用指导。

有抵押债务

先讲述较理想的情况,即债务受抵押(例如股票)保障,贷款人应在违约时迅速采取措施,以根据抵押文件强制执行担保利益。

大多数股票抵押是受衡平法监管,其实益权已转让给贷方,并且附有一套预先签订的文件以便贷方转让法定所有权。 但是,转让文件的签发和提交本身并不会赋予贷方不受限制的所有权,因为一旦偿还债务,在衡平法底下借款人可赎回股份的所有权。

为了消除上述衡平权益,贷方须根据抵押文件的规定,通过以下方式之一出售股份:1)在取得抵押之所有权后出售予第三方; 2)利用预先签定的委托书出售; 或3)委任接管人出售。 看起来很简单,在行使销售权时,贷方有法律责任要行使合理的努力以取得在可行情况下的最佳价格。此外,法定下还禁止 “自我交易”(即贷方不能购买抵押权益)。 在这些限制底下,通常建议将出售责任委托给专业的接管人。

检查清单

1.    抵押文件的管辖法律是什么?
2.    是否有转移法定所有权的机制?
3.    在抵押文件下有那些方法执行权益?
4.    行使销售权的最佳方法是什么?

无抵押债务

如果没有任何抵押,则需要法院的协助,以通过借款人拥有的资产收回欠债。 如债务受香港或中国法律管辖,许多贷方都知道,第一步,应寻求法院判决以确认债务的有效性。 如借款人持有海外资产,则应进一步将判决经由资产所在地法院认定其有效性 (技术上称为 “本土化”)。

尽管香港与英属维京群岛之间没有协议互相承认彼此的判决,但最近英属维京群岛法院承认并执行了中国法院判决,是英属维京群岛法院第首次承认中国法院判决的案例。该申请源于对中国债务人的判决,债务人是英属维京群岛公司的唯一股东,藉该公司持有一家香港上市公司的股份。

在将国内判决本土化后,英属维京群岛进法院接着针对该公司的股份颁发押记令。这使贷方成为有担保贷方。但是,由于实际上很难出售几乎没有账簿和记录的股票,于是贷方决定申请任命接管人,接管人可行使股东投票权来控制公司,以进行清算。其资产最终偿还贷方。

在批准申请时,法院确认可以针对英属维京群岛公司的股份任命接管人,然后接管人有权先任命公司董事,再以公司之名出售资产来实现股份的价值,从而偿还判决债务。 法院特别提到,在基础资产价值未知的情况下,任命接管人而非直接命令出售股票是合适的。

英属维京群岛法院为协助外国贷方的实际做法绝对是佳音。

检查清单
1.    债务的适用法律是什么?
2.    债务是否有争议?
3.    资产位于何处?
4.    是否有足够的有关资产价值的信息来帮助处置资产?

结论
 

关键要点: 贷方在追索行动前应寻求涵盖香港和离岸方面的综合建议,这将能够有效收回资产。

Filed Under: 争议解决

China Trademark Practice – A Letter of Consent

November 6, 2020 by OLN Marketing

When trademark applicants/owners receive refusal of their trademark applications due to prior similar mark(s) flagged by the examiner, how can the applicants overcome the citation(s) by way of filing an application for review of the refusal with the China Intellectual Property Administration (“CNIPA”), in order to eventually have the applied-for mark approved for registration?  

To overcome the citation(s) in the review proceedings, apart from arguing against the similarities between the respective marks, it will be very helpful to overcome the prior similar mark(s) by way of submitting  a letter of consent (“LoC”) issued by the cited owner of the prior similar mark(s) agreeing on the use and registration of the applied-for mark in China, which is alternatively is called “co-existence agreement” in China. 

We would like to share with you our views of the functions and practice of the LoC/co-existence agreement in China.

RELEVANT LAW/RULES/GUIDELINES

The PRC Trademark Law does not have specifical content and definition about LoC or co-existence agreement.

Nevertheless, in the “Trademark Trial and Appeal Rules” issued by CNIPA, Article 8 shows the parties can reach settlement dealing with the trademark rights. This is regarded as a basis of the LoC.

  • Article 8 During the trademark review and hearing, a party shall have the right to, in accordance with the law, dispose of his own trademark right and the rights in connection with the trademark review and hearing. On the premise of considering public interests and the third-party rights, both parties concerned may reach a reconciliation agreement in written form, and the Trademark Review and Hearing Board may also hold mediations in this regard.

In addition, in the “2019 – Beijing High People’s Court Guidelines for the Trial of Trademark Right Granting and Verification Cases“ issued by the Beijing High People’s Court, the following three Articles are in relation to the nature, formalities, and legal effects of LoC:

  • 15.10 When determining whether the respective marks are similar, a LoC could be prima facie evidence to obviate the confusion of the marks.
  • 15.11 The LoC must be issued in written form by the cited owner specifying particulars of the applied-for mark and agreeing on use and registration of the applied-for mark. The LoC cannot have any condition and time limitation, otherwise, it shall not be accepted.

         The LoC shall be genuine, legal, and valid, and not harm the interests of the state, the public and the third party, otherwise the LoC shall not be accepted.

  • 15.12 If the respective marks are identical or substantially identical with each other, and their designated goods/services are identical or similar, the applied-for mark shall not be approved for registration based on the submitted LoC only.  

           If the respective marks are similar, their designated goods/services are identical or similar, and there is no evidence showing public confusion of the sources of goods/services caused by the marks’ co-existence, the respective marks shall be considered dissimilar under the LoC submitted.

OUR COMMENT

In accordance with the above-mentioned relevant Rules and Guidelines and the practice below, similar to other countries/jurisdictions like the U.S. and Hong Kong, the examiner at CNIPA, in particular the judge at the Courts tends to withdraw the citation(s) and approves the registration of the applied-for mark, if a LoC is submitted either in review proceedings or in Court proceedings. 

To illustrate the acceptance of the LoC, we set out some landmark precedents in the table below for your reference:

Table to illustrate the acceptance of the LoC

In conclusion, we have successfully overcome prior marks by way of submitting LoCs. Despite the fact that China adopts case-by-case principle and precedents are not binding in China, based on the current practices, we believe that a LoC will be very helpful to overcome the prior similar mark(s). Although the examiner/judge has her/his discretion whether to accept a LoC based on the possibilities of confusion, there is a good chance that they will withdraw the citation(s) if the LoC is submitted; unless the marks are too similar, and the goods/services are identical.

One point to note is that the LoC must be notarized, if the cited owner is a foreign company/individual, the notarized LoC must be legalized by the local Chinese Consulate. 

If you have any questions in relation to the LoC and/or protection of your trademark in China, please feel free to contact please contact evelyne.yeung@oln-law.com or angel.luo@oln-law.com,. We are happy to assist you in the matter, e.g. assessing the chance of acceptance of the LoC, approaching the cited owner for a LoC, preparing a LoC that is acceptable by CNIPA/Court, submitting the notarized and legalized LoC to CNIPA/Court, and requesting the examiner/judge in charge of the case to accept the LoC and approve your applied-mark for registration.   

Filed Under: 知识产权法

Oldham, Li & Nie Launches Document Automation Platform

October 23, 2020 by OLN Marketing

Oldham, Li & Nie Solicitors OLN, a leading Hong Kong law firm, announced today its partnership with Zegal for the launch of OLN online: www.oln-online.com , a cloud based document automation platform, powered by Zegal. The platform, which is the first to be introduced by a Hong Kong law firm, provides its clients and its lawyers with seamless solutions and instant access to a wide range of legal documents, 24/7, remotely, with online support from OLN’s professionals.

The platform offers a documentary archive and other resources for various practice areas, instantly accessible by clients to generate time-critical transactional documents with ease, when and where such need arises.

Gordon Oldham, Senior Partner of OLN said: “The legal profession has been slow to embrace technology. Our new platform and a number of other client communication technology tools and resources we are introducing acknowledge the changing landscape of what professionals and their clients want and their need to communicate and collaborate. OLN online is designed for the provision of better service to Clients and efficiency of work for OLN lawyers and support teams.”

Hung-Chou Tai, CEO of Zegal said: “We are extremely excited to be working with OLN to launch the first truly digital “Law as a Service” offering in Hong Kong. The OLN online platform will allow an unprecedented level of customer service and convenience with consistent quality. Companies in Hong Kong will now have access to their legal partners anywhere and at any time.”

Oldham, Li & Nie Solicitors was founded in 1987 with offices in Hong Kong and Shanghai with a business-centric practice in:  

•    Corporate and Commercial;
•    Dispute Resolution;
•    Tax and Business Advisory;
•    Insolvency & Restructuring;
•    Intellectual Property;
•    Insurance; 
•    Private Client Services; and
•    Family law, Trusts and Succession.

OLN has consistently been ranked as a top tier Hong Kong law firm by Chambers Asia Pacific and Legal 500 Asia Pacific. For more details, please visit https://oln-law.com.

Media Contact:
Oldham, Li & Nie Marketing Team
Ruby Ng, (852) 2868 0696 
marketing.oln@oln-law.com
 

Filed Under: 最新消息

OLN Nominated for Six Awards in the ALB Hong Kong Law Awards 2020

October 20, 2020 by OLN Marketing

Oldham, Li & Nie is pleased to be shortlisted as finalist in the following six categories:

  • Managing Partner of the Year – Gordon Oldham
  • Young Lawyer of the Year – Anna Chan

Firm of the Year categories:-

  • Civil Litigation Law Firm of the Year 
  • Intellectual Property Law Firm of the Year
  • Labour and Employment Law Firm of the Year
  • Restructuring and Insolvency Law Firm of the Year

Congratulations to the teams! 

For more information, please visit the link here: https://www.legalbusinessonline.com/law-awards/alb-hong-kong-law-awards-2020?utm_source=ALB+ALL+-+Events&utm_campaign=aa8ef9ecfe-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2020_01_24_03_11_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_c7f887c850-aa8ef9ecfe-55528184#edit-group-finalists

Filed Under: 最新消息

COVID-19 and Force Majeure in Hong Kong

October 19, 2020 by OLN Marketing

COVID-19 and Force Majeure in Hong Kong - part 1
COVID-19 and Force Majeure in Hong Kong - part 2
COVID-19 and Force Majeure in Hong Kong - part 3

Filed Under: 公司和商业法

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 23
  • Page 24
  • Page 25
  • Page 26
  • Page 27
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 53
  • Go to Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

This website uses cookies to optimise your experience and to collect information to customise content. By closing this banner, clicking a link or continuing to browse otherwise, you agree to the use of cookies. Please read the cookies section of our Privacy Policy to learn more. Learn more

Footer

OLN logo

香港中环雪厂街二号圣佐治大厦
五楼503室

电话 +852 2868 0696 | 电邮我们
关于 律师团队 办事处 OLN IP Services 私隐政策
专业服务 最新消息 加入我们 OLN Online
关于 专业服务 律师团队 最新消息 办事处
加入我们 OLN IP Services OLN Online 私隐政策
linkedin twitter facebook
OLN logo

© 2025 Oldham, Li & Nie. All Rights Reserved.

Manage Consent
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Manage options Manage services Manage {vendor_count} vendors Read more about these purposes
View preferences
{title} {title} {title}
联系我们

请在此处分享您的消息的详细信息。我们会尽快与您联系。

    x