OLN

Test Blog

CEDB Released a Public Consultation Paper on Updating Hong Kong’s Copyright Regime on 24 November

by

The Commerce and Economic Development Bureau of the Government of Hong Kong just released on 24 November 2021 a public consultation paper on updating Hong Kong’s copyright regime. 

This is brilliant news to copyright owners and fingers crossed with the passage of the new legislation! If you may wonder the meaning behind, the current Copyright Ordinance enacted in 1997 is considered badly obsolete and can barely cope with the rapid advancements and innovations in technology. Despite the Government’s deliberation to update the legislation initiated since 2006 with public consultations conducted,  two serious attempts to amend the Ordinance (The Copyright (Amendment) Bill 2011 and The Copyright (Amendment) Bill 2014) did not succeed due to filibustering by some members asserting the view that freedom of creativity or expression could possibly be compromised under the proposed legislative provisions.

The consultation paper described the legislative proposals in the 2014 Bill to be the result of years of deliberations of the Government, Legislative Council, copyright owners, online service providers and copyright users, representing the consensus and balance of interests of different stakeholders to enhance protection for copyright in the digital environment and combat large scale online piracy – which should be materialized without further delay.  

Key legislative proposals based on the 2014 Bill

A. Communication right – introduction of technology-neutral exclusive communication right for copyright owners to communicate their works to the public through any mode of electronic transmission in line with the international practice

B. Criminal liability – criminal sanctions introduced against infringers making unauthorised communication of copyright works to the public for profit or reward and with prejudice caused to the copyright owners

C. New copyright exceptions – for the education sector, libraries, museums, archives, temporary reproduction of copyright works by OSPs, and media shifting; and new fair dealing exceptions for the purposes of parody, satire, caricature and pastiche, commenting on current events, and use of quotation to facilitate expression of opinions or discussions in the online and traditional environment

D. Safe harbour provisions – limiting OSP’s liability for copyright infringements on their service platforms caused by subscribers as an incentive for OSPs to cooperate with copyright owners to combat online piracy

E. Additional damages in civil cases – empowering the court to award additional damages according to the circumstances with additional factors to assess including the unreasonable conduct of an infringer and likelihood of widespread circulation of infringing copies

Issues inviting public views

1. Should Hong Kong continue to maintain the current exhaustive approach by setting out all copyright exceptions based on specific purposes or circumstances?

2. Should Hong Kong introduce provisions to restrict the use of contracts to exclude or limit the application of statutory copyright exceptions? (currently is non-interference approach to contractual arrangements between owners and users)

3. Should Hong Kong introduce specific provisions to govern illicit streaming devices used for accessing unauthorized contents on the Internet, including set-top boxes and Apps? (Government’s current position is not to)

4. Should Hong Kong introduce a copyright-specific judicial site blocking mechanism? (Government’s current position is not to)

Issues to be considered for future legislative amendments
  • Extension of copyright term of protection
  • Introduction of specific copyright exceptions for text and data mining
  • AI and copyright

The consultation period is 3 months from 24 November 2021. We are more than happy to convey your thoughts to the Bureau or share our thoughts on issues you may have on copyright protection or circumstances that may put you at the risk of infringing someone else’s copyright.

Essential Guide: Appointing an In-House Head of Computer System Security

by

Hong Kong’s Protection of Critical Infrastructures (Computer Systems) Ordinance (Cap. 653) sets tough standards for Critical Infrastructure Operators (CIOs) to protect their Critical Computer Systems (CCSs) from cyber risks. A key requirement? Appointing a dedicated in-house head to oversee computer system security. This can’t be outsourced—it must be an internal employee for full accountability.

While these guidelines are tailored to CIOs under Cap. 653, they also serve as best practices for employing any high-level management role, ensuring accountability, smooth transitions, and risk mitigation across organizations.

Based on Cap. 653, Code of Practice (v1.0), and insights from the Office of the Commissioner of Critical Infrastructure (Computer-system Security) (OCCICS) website and FAQs, here’s why this role matters and practical HR tips to handle it smoothly.

The Must-Have In-House Role: Why It Can’t Be Outsourced

CIOs need to set up a security management unit and appoint an employee to lead it (s.21(4); Code of Practice §5.3.2). This falls under Category 1 organizational duties.

  • Purpose: To build strong security governance tailored to your CIO’s unique risks.
  • In-House Requirement: The head must have “adequate professional knowledge” specific to your operations (OCCICS FAQ 6). Outsourcing of computer-system security management units is allowed but the head must be an employee appointed by the CIO (OCCICS FAQ 7).
  • Accountability: While suppliers can help with other tasks (via contracts), core oversight stays internal.
  • Risks of Non-Compliance: Fines up to HK$5 million for the organization (ss. 7, 26, 28 and 70)—but no personal penalties for individuals (OCCICS FAQ 24).

With potential designations looming as of January 16, 2026, prioritize this hire now to stay ahead.

HR Essentials: What to Focus On

Managing this role involves blending HR best practices with regulatory needs. Break it down into key areas:

1. Defining the Role and Finding the Right Fit

The head leads the security unit, handling everything from risk assessments to incident responses. This role is not just an IT function but spans cross-business units (BUs), integrating security with operations, finance, legal, and other areas to address enterprise-wide risks.

  • Core Duties: Create and implement a security plan, including access controls, training, and supply chain checks (Code of Practice §§6.2.5–6.2.27). They co-endorse the plan with top executives and review it every two years or after changes.
  • Qualifications Needed: Look for certifications like CISSP, CISM, or CISA, plus experience matching your CCS threats (Code of Practice §5.3.2).

HR Tip: Involve senior management in hiring to align with strategy—they must grasp its importance for compliance, co-endorsement (Code of Practice §6.2.1), and avoiding fines/risks across BUs (OCCICS FAQ 6). Highlight Ordinance and cross-BU aspects in job postings; verify credentials for OCCICS (Annex C of Code of Practice); onboard with team training (Code of Practice §6.2.27).

2. Handling Changes and Notifications

Any shift in this role counts as a “material change” that must be reported, including during employment termination to maintain continuity and avoid compliance gaps.

  • What Triggers Notification: New hires, departures (such as resignations or terminations), or anything affecting security (s.22(1); Annex D of Code of Practice; OCCICS FAQ 8).
  • How to Report: Use Annex C with details like name, qualifications, and start or end date (Code of Practice §5.3.3).

HR Tip: Include notification clauses in contracts; report to OCCICS immediately post-hire or termination. Require advance exit notice, successor planning, and handover to link with exit protocols and prevent disruptions.

3. Understanding Legal Risks for the Employee

The role is high-stakes, but liability is organizational.

  • No Personal Fines: Penalties hit the CIO, not the individual (OCCICS FAQ 24).
  • Internal Protections: Clear duties help avoid blame in disputes.

HR Tip: Add indemnity clauses (excluding wilful errors); link reviews to security goals for accountability, trust, and lower turnover.

4. Managing Exits: Termination, Garden Leave, and Handovers

Smooth transitions are crucial to maintain continuity (Category 1).

  • Key Concerns: Sudden exits could disrupt operations and require immediate reporting.
  • No Fixed Rules: But longer notice periods help with knowledge transfer.

HR Tip: Use 3–6 month notice periods for handovers (data/knowledge transfer, successor training); apply garden leave for secrecy (s.57, up to HK$1M fines); limit non-competes to sensitive data; ensure pay and audit support.

Wrapping Up: Make It a Smart Move

View this appointment as a boost to your cyber defenses, not just compliance. Keep detailed HR records—they can back due diligence defenses (ss.65–66).

For custom advice, reach out to Oldham Li & Nie. Aligning HR with Cap. 653 now strengthens your position in Hong Kong’s evolving critical infrastructure landscape.

Disclaimer: This article is for reference only. Nothing herein shall be construed as Hong Kong legal advice or any legal advice for that matter to any person. Oldham, Li & Nie shall not be held liable for any loss and/or damage incurred by any person acting as a result of the materials contained in this article.

Are You Ready for Madrid?

by

Are you ready for Madrid – not for a relaxing holiday or to watch your favourite football team, but to extend your trade mark (brand) protection internationally.

In this context, “Madrid” refers to the Madrid System for the International Registration of Marks, an international framework administered by the World Intellectual Property Organization (“WIPO”). The system enables the trade mark owners to seek protection in multiple jurisdictions through a single application filed in one language, under one set of fees, thereby streamlining the international filing process and reducing administrative burdens.

Madrid System and Hong Kong: Current Position

At present, it is not yet possible to designate Hong Kong under the Madrid System, nor to file an international trade mark application through the Hong Kong Trade Marks Registry. The Hong Kong Government enacted the Trade Marks (Amendment) Ordinance 2020 to establish the legal framework for implementing the Madrid Protocol, but the relevant provisions will only take effect on a date to be appointed once all necessary preparatory work has been completed.

Recent government policy updates confirm that preparatory work for Hong Kong’s participation in the Madrid Protocol remains ongoing, and that implementation will only commence after the completion of legislative, IT and related arrangements. As of early 2026, no official commencement date or target year has been announced, and there is still no confirmed timetable for when the Madrid System will be extended to Hong Kong.

In anticipation of Hong Kong’s future participation in the Madrid System, it is helpful to understand the key filing requirements.

Basic Requirements for a Madrid Application

1. Eligibility

To use the Madrid System, an applicant must have a real and effective connection with at least one Madrid member. You will qualify if you:

  • are a national of, domiciled in, or have an industrial or commercial establishment in a Madrid member; and
  • have already filed or registered a trade mark (the “basic mark”) with the IP office of that member (the “Office of Origin”).

2. Basic mark requirement

Before filing an international application, you must already have filed or registered a national or regional trade mark in your Office of Origin. This “basic mark” must:

  • be the same mark;
  • be owned by the same proprietor; and
  • cover goods and/or services that are identical to, or narrower than, those claimed in the international application.

3. International application

The international application must:

  • be filed through the Office of Origin (not sent directly to WIPO);
  • use the prescribed WIPO form MM2 or a recognised e‑filing tool such as eMadrid or the Madrid Application Assistant;
  • match the particulars of the basic mark (owner details, mark representation, goods/services); and
  • designate at least one Madrid member, with payment of the WIPO basic fee plus the relevant per‑member or per‑class fees.

4. Examination and Grant of Protection

Once your Office of Origin has certified and forwarded the international application, WIPO conducts a formalities examination only, checking fees, classification and technical compliance. If the application does not comply, WIPO issues an irregularity notice to you and the Office of Origin, usually allowing a limited period (commonly three months) to correct the deficiencies.

If the formal requirements are met, WIPO records the mark in the International Register, publishes it in the WIPO Gazette of International Marks, issues a Certificate of International Registration, and notifies each designated IP office. Each designated national or regional office then carries out its own substantive examination under local trade mark law and must grant or refuse protection within a prescribed time limit, typically 12 or 18 months from notification.

If the mark is accepted, it is protected in that jurisdiction as if registered directly at the national or regional office. If protection is provisionally refused, you may need to appoint local counsel in that jurisdiction to respond or appeal in accordance with local procedures.

How to Protect Your Trade Mark in Hong Kong Now

As Hong Kong has not yet implemented the Madrid System, trade mark protection in Hong Kong can only be obtained by filing a separate application directly with the Hong Kong Trade Marks Registry.

At this stage, Hong Kong cannot be designated in an international registration under the Madrid System, and international applications cannot be filed through the Hong Kong Registry as an Office of Origin.

Where brand owners are also seeking protection in other jurisdictions that are members of the Madrid System, they will typically need to pursue two parallel routes:

  • file a standalone local application in Hong Kong for protection in the Hong Kong market; and
  • either file separate national or regional applications in other territories, or, where available, make use of the Madrid System via an eligible Office of Origin outside Hong Kong (for example, through an associated company or establishment in a Madrid member country).

This approach reflects the current reality: Hong Kong remains a separate, locally‑filed registration, while the Madrid System may be used only for those jurisdictions where it is already in force and where the applicant otherwise meets the eligibility requirements.

Getting Ready for Madrid in Hong Kong

As Hong Kong moves toward future implementation of the Madrid Protocol, it is prudent for brand owners to ensure that their key marks are already filed and registered in Hong Kong so that they can satisfy Madrid eligibility requirements once the system becomes available locally.

Our firm would be pleased to assist you with filing and maintaining trade mark registrations in Hong Kong and with developing an international filing strategy to take full advantage of the Madrid System when it is launched here.

Disclaimer: This article is for reference only. Nothing herein shall be construed as Hong Kong legal advice or any legal advice for that matter to any person. Oldham, Li & Nie shall not be held liable for any loss and/or damage incurred by any person acting as a result of the materials contained in this article.

Hong Kong Company Re-Domiciliation Regime: A New Gateway for International Businesses

by

From 23 May 2025, Hong Kong has introduced a modern company re-domiciliation framework that allows overseas companies to relocate their place of incorporation to Hong Kong without creating a new legal entity. The initiative, implemented under the Companies (Amendment) (No. 2) Ordinance 2025, is designed to strengthen Hong Kong’s appeal as a premier international business centre and to encourage inward corporate migration.

This new regime provides a practical solution for multinational groups seeking legal certainty, tax efficiency, and continuity when restructuring their global footprint.

Overview of the Re-Domiciliation Framework

Under the Hong Kong re-domiciliation regime, an eligible foreign company may transfer its corporate domicile to Hong Kong while preserving its legal identity. The company continues uninterrupted, retaining its assets, liabilities, contractual rights, and legal proceedings.

Once approved, the re-domiciled entity is treated in the same way as a company originally incorporated in Hong Kong and becomes subject to the Companies Ordinance and other applicable local legislation.

Key Characteristics of the Regime

The regime offers several defining features that distinguish it from traditional corporate migration options:

  • Eligible Company Types
    The regime applies to non-Hong Kong companies comparable to Hong Kong private companies limited by shares, public companies limited by shares,  private unlimited companies with share capital and public unlimited companies with share capital.  Companies limited by guarantee without share capital are excluded.
  • No Economic Substance Threshold
    There is no minimum size, turnover, or sector requirement, making the regime accessible to a broad range of businesses.
  • Retention of Legal Structure
    Companies must re-domicile using their existing legal form. Conversion into a different corporate type is not permitted as part of the process.
  • Full Local Status After Migration
    Once re-domiciled, the company is regarded as a Hong Kong-incorporated entity for corporate law purposes.
  • Inbound-Only Mechanism
    The regime allows migration into Hong Kong but does not provide a statutory route for companies to migrate out.
  • Ongoing Compliance Obligations
    Re-domiciled companies must maintain a registered office in Hong Kong and comply with all applicable filing, governance, and statutory requirements.

Strategic Benefits of Re-Domiciling to Hong Kong

Re-domiciliation offers significant commercial and operational advantages:

Continuity of Business Operations

The company’s existence remains uninterrupted. There is no liquidation, asset transfer, or novation of contracts, which helps preserve commercial relationships and regulatory approvals.

Cost and Time Efficiency

By avoiding dissolution and re-incorporation, companies reduce administrative burden, professional fees, and execution risk.

Eligibility Requirements

To qualify for re-domiciliation, a company must satisfy both jurisdictional and corporate conditions.

Legal Eligibility
  • Permission Under Home Jurisdiction Law
    The laws of the company’s original jurisdiction of incorporation must allow outbound re-domiciliation (for example, permitted in the BVI and Cayman Islands but restricted in certain jurisdictions such as Bermuda).
  • Comparable Corporate Form
    The company must closely correspond to one of the eligible Hong Kong company types.
  • Operating History
    The company must have completed at least one full financial year prior to applying.
Financial and Integrity Safeguards

The regime incorporates safeguards to protect stakeholders and the integrity of the process:

  • Solvency Confirmation
    The company must not be in liquidation or receivership. Directors are required to certify solvency.
  • Good Faith Requirement
    Applications must be made genuinely and not for improper or abusive purposes.
  • Member and Creditor Protection
    Approval from at least 75% of members is required, and creditors must be formally notified of the proposed re-domiciliation.

Re-Domiciliation Application Process

When documentation is complete, the re-domiciliation procedure typically takes around two weeks.

Key documents include:

  • Proposed Articles of Association aligned with Hong Kong requirements
  • Legal opinion from the original jurisdiction confirming eligibility and compliance
  • Director’s certificate confirming solvency and good faith
  • Recent financial statements (audited or unaudited, dated within the last 12 months)
  • Prescribed application forms containing corporate particulars

Upon approval, the Companies Registry issues a Certificate of Re-Domiciliation, confirming the company’s status as a Hong Kong entity.

Following re-domiciliation, the company must:

  • Deregister from its original jurisdiction within 120 days
  • File post-registration forms reporting corporate details
  • Maintain a registered office in Hong Kong
  • Appoint a Company Secretary and a Designated Representative

Hong Kong Tax Implications

Hong Kong’s territorial tax system provides clarity and potential advantages for re-domiciled companies:

  • Profits Tax
    Only profits arising in or derived from Hong Kong are subject to tax.
  • Tax Residency and Treaties
    Re-domiciled companies are generally regarded as Hong Kong tax residents for treaty purposes, subject to meeting substance and management requirements.
  • Stamp Duty
    No stamp duty is payable on the re-domiciliation itself, although subsequent transfers of shares may attract Hong Kong stamp duty.

Considerations for Regulated Industries

Companies operating in regulated sectors—such as banking, insurance, and financial services—must engage with the relevant regulators and comply with sector-specific legislation, including licensing and approval requirements under applicable ordinances.

Early regulatory engagement is strongly recommended to avoid delays.

Who Should Consider Re-Domiciling to Hong Kong?

The Hong Kong company re-domiciliation regime is particularly attractive for:

  • Businesses with existing or planned operations in Hong Kong
  • Financial institutions and insurers seeking regulatory alignment
  • Holding companies managing investment or intellectual property structures
  • Corporate groups aiming to access Hong Kong’s extensive tax treaty network
  • Multinational enterprises adapting to evolving global tax and transparency standards

Next Steps

The re-domiciliation regime offers a flexible and business-friendly route for companies seeking a stable, internationally recognised legal base in Hong Kong.

For tailored advice on whether re-domiciliation is suitable for your organisation, and for guidance on the application process, please contact us via the enquiry form.

Disclaimer: This article is for reference only. Nothing herein shall be construed as Hong Kong legal advice or any legal advice for that matter to any person. Oldham, Li & Nie shall not be held liable for any loss and/or damage incurred by any person acting as a result of the materials contained in this article.

Issuance of the Grant of Representation Is Only the Beginning – Not the End: Understanding the Importance of Vesting of Beneficial Interest

by

In Hong Kong, when a person passes away, his or her estate does not automatically pass to anyone. Instead, the law requires that someone be formally authorised to manage the estate. To be appointed as the authorised representative, that person must obtain a Grant of Representation from the Probate Registry (“the Grant”).

However, many people mistakenly believe that they automatically become the owner of the deceased’s assets upon the issuance of the Grant. In fact, the Grant marks only the starting point of the estate administration process — not the end.

This article explains why, even after obtaining the Grant, further steps are required to transfer the deceased’s assets so the beneficial ownership can be properly vested (namely, to become a real owner of the property)

1. What does the Grant actually do?

The issuance of the Grant (i.e. Probate or Letters of Administration) only confers legal authority on the executor (where there is a Will) or administrator (where the deceased left no Will) (collectively referred to as “Personal Representative”) to:

  • identify and collect the deceased’s assets;
  • pay the deceased’s debts and expenses (such as funeral costs and taxes);
  • manage, protect, and, if necessary, sell estate property;
  • ultimately distribute the estate according to the Will or intestacy laws.

In other words, the Grant only gives the personal representative authority to deal with the deceased’s assets. It does not transfer any beneficial interest to the Personal Representative. The Personal Representative must follow proper legal procedures to ensure that the beneficial interest vests in the rightful beneficiaries.

2. The Need for the Subsequent Step: Vesting

Vesting is the legal process by which the beneficial interest in estate property is transferred to the person entitled — whether that is a beneficiary under a Will, or, in some cases, the administrator(s) themselves if they are the proper recipient under the intestacy rules.

Depending on the type of asset(s), vesting may require formal steps such as:

  • Flat, land, property: execution of an assent and updating the relevant authorities, such as Land Registry.
  • Bank balance or shares: giving instructions to the relevant bank(s) for distribution.
  • Other assets: For example, assignment contractual rights or business interests, physical delivery.

Only after completing the act of vesting, the individual becomes the beneficial (i.e. “real”) owner of the property.

3. When the Personal Representative is also the Beneficiary

It is common for a personal representative to also be entitled to inherit some or all of the estate. However, even in such circumstances, the act of vesting remains necessary. This is because the Personal Representative holds the estate property only as Personal Representative of the deceased, not in their personal capacity, until the vesting process is properly completed.

This ensures proper accounting, protects creditors, prevents misuse of estate assets, and provides clarity and finality in the estate distribution process.

Conclusion

Obtaining a grant of probate or letters of administration is an important milestone in the estate administration process, but it is not the final step.

The Personal Representative must still carry out the act of vesting to transfer beneficial ownership to the rightful parties — whether beneficiaries or, in some cases, themselves.

This distinction between the authority to administer and actual ownership is fundamental in estate law, ensuring proper protection of the deceased’s assets and fair distribution to those entitled.

Our Senior Associate Kacy Lam has experience in preparing land documents (including Assents) and handling land matters. Therefore, we can assist the client not only with the probate application, but also with the subsequent vesting process. Please feel free to contact us for more information.

Disclaimer: This article is for reference only. Nothing herein shall be construed as Hong Kong legal advice or any legal advice for that matter to any person. Oldham, Li & Nie shall not be held liable for any loss and/or damage incurred by any person acting as a result of the materials contained in this article.

Enduring Power of Attorney (EPOA), Committeeship, and Guardianship in Hong Kong

by

How do you protect family assets when mental health deteriorates? As life expectancy rises in Hong Kong, more and more of us are living into our golden years. But with age comes a potential decline in mental capacity. Lacking the legally required mental capacity, we are unable to engage in the most basic of financial transactions such as heading to the bank to withdraw money to pay hospital bills.

Enduring Power of Attorney (EPOA)

To avoid the situation where institutions and authorities refuse to accept your instructions on financial transactions on the basis of your lack of mental capacity, one should consider setting up an Enduring Power of Attorney (EPOA). Under the Enduring Powers of Attorney Ordinance, an EPOA allows you to choose a trusted individual to manage your property and financial affairs in the event mental incapacity sets in.

There are a few technical requirements that must be met before an EPOA becomes valid. The most important one is that the document must be witnessed by a Hong Kong solicitor and certified by a Hong Kong doctor, usually a psychiatrist, who conducts a mental capacity test and confirms that you have the requisite mental capacity to be signing over your rights to another person.

To protect your EPOA from future challenges, you should ask your solicitor if periodic assessments or renewal of the EPOA is recommended.

Committeeship

If no EPOA is in place before the person becomes mentally incapable, families will need to apply to the court for Committeeship under Part II of the Mental Health Ordinance. The application is expensive and takes a long time and every year the guardian must report to the court on monies spent.

Guardianship

Whilst the Enduring Power of Attorney deals with the financial affairs of a person, a guardianship order is focused on the welfare and day-to-day care of a mentally incapacitated person.

If you would like to have a confidential discussion about creating or challenging an EPOA, applying for guardianship, or have questions about other aspects of estate planning, please feel free to contact us. We’re here to help.

Estate Planning in Hong Kong

by

Have you made preparations to ensure your loved ones will receive the assets you worked hard to acquire? Or is this something you keep postponing? Thinking about the topic of death can feel overwhelming. However, without a Will, your assets will be distributed in accordance with Hong Kong legislation which may not reflect your wishes.

Let’s explore some critical considerations before drafting a Will.

First, you should identify the persons who will inherit. Those are the beneficiaries. It’s also vital to have a contingency plan in case one of your beneficiaries predecease you.

Secondly, select an executive will be responsible for applying to the court for probate and upon the granting of a court order, engaging in the actual distribution of your assets. For example, dealing with the banks to access items stored in safety deposit boxes and handing over cash to beneficiaries.

Additionally, you should carefully consider how and where you will store your Will.

In addition to drafting a Will, if you wish to ensure that your finances are well taken care of in the event you become mentally incapacitated, you should think about establishing an Enduring Power of Attorney (EPOA). This document is effective only during your lifetime and enables you to designate a trusted individual to manage financial matters on your behalf, such as paying hospital bills, engaging in real estate transactions, and handling other financial matters.

The reason an Enduring Power of Attorney (EPOA) is needed in the event you become mentally unable is because financial institutions and other authorities will not accept your instructions once they learn of your mental incapacity.

Ultimately, effective estate planning protects both you and your loved ones. Even with a Will in place, disputes can arise, potentially leading to lawsuits, which can drag on for years and become expensive. Often, death is an emotionally charged event and can cause people to become different from their usual selves.

If you would like to discuss how to effectively plan your Will, please feel free to reach out to us anytime.