我们很高兴地宣布,高李严律师行再次获得《亚洲法律》的高度推荐。
《亚洲法律概况2022》认可本行在以下业务领域的专业知识:
- 争议解决
- 企业并购
- 知识产权
- 劳工及雇佣
- 私人客户
- 重组与破产
- 保险

关于《亚洲法律》
《亚洲法律概况》专注于亚太地区商事法律服务领域的调研 。同时,为23个司法管辖地区(从孟加拉到越南)内的 28 个行业和领域,提供律师事务所的推荐和编辑分析。
《亚洲法律概况》于每年 9 月在线发布。
《亚洲法律概况2022》是第 26 届的年度刊物。
2021 年 9 月
Suite 503, St. George's Building,
2 Ice House Street, Central, Hong Kong
我们很高兴地宣布,高李严律师行再次获得《亚洲法律》的高度推荐。
《亚洲法律概况2022》认可本行在以下业务领域的专业知识:
关于《亚洲法律》
《亚洲法律概况》专注于亚太地区商事法律服务领域的调研 。同时,为23个司法管辖地区(从孟加拉到越南)内的 28 个行业和领域,提供律师事务所的推荐和编辑分析。
《亚洲法律概况》于每年 9 月在线发布。
《亚洲法律概况2022》是第 26 届的年度刊物。
2021 年 9 月
The pandemic has turned our lives upside down. Not only because of the health consequences of the Coronavirus, but also because if you and your family are used to traveling, this last year and a half has been challenging.
Whether you are a Hongkonger owning a holiday home in Europe, or a European living and working in Hong Kong, this crisis has shown us that international travel as we know might become more complicated.
These uncertain times are the opportunity to reflect about our future, particularly when it comes to families owning assets in several countries, parents whose children live abroad, or expats who are considering returning to their home countries.
Estate planning is a real issue that should not be left for last minute. It is indeed possible to plan ahead to avoid difficulties arising upon death. There are several tools which will give you and your family a bit of certainty about the future.
OLN can help you secure your assets and plan your inheritance in advance.
European inheritance law might become complex when it comes to international families, especially regarding the following aspects:
Many foreign couples got married abroad or even in Hong Kong without drafting a prenuptial or postnuptial agreement.
Depending on the countries involved in your particular situation – nationality of the spouses and heirs, location of the assets – the applicable law to the matrimonial property regime could affect inheritance.
Foreigners living in Europe and Europeans living in Europe and abroad are able to choose the applicable law to their matrimonial property regime. Indeed, European Regulation No. 2016/1103 of 24 June 2016 implementing enhanced cooperation in the area of jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters of matrimonial property regimes entered in force on 29th January 2019. Article 22 of this regulation allows couples to designate either the national law of one of the spouses, either the law of their habitual residence.
Once the applicable law designated, the spouses will be able to choose their matrimonial property regime. For example, a couple might choose separation of assets. However, under some European laws the spouses might be able to choose another property regime, more protective to the other spouse upon death.
This choice could have an impact on inheritance, since the surviving spouse might be entitled to a significant part of the assets acquired during marriage.
To determine your matrimonial property regime is therefore essential for estate planning.
In order to limit the difficulties raised above, the European Union adopted Regulation No 650/2012 on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement of decisions and acceptance and enforcement of authentic instruments in matters of succession and on the creation of a European Certificate of Succession.
From a European point of view, the applicable law to the succession will be the law of the last domicile of the deceased. However, the regulation allows citizens to choose their national law as the applicable law. A competent lawyer in both jurisdictions will be able to advise you about the best applicable law for your inheritance.
The regulation also creates a “European Certificate of Succession”, an essential document to be drafted by a local authority in order to transfer the ownership of the assets located in Europe to the heirs.
The local authority will need to ensure that the will respects European procedures.
Several tools are available for international estate planning besides drafting a will in Europe and Hong Kong. You could consider donating part of your assets to your children or incorporating a company who will own your real estate for your family.
An assessment of your particular situation is needed in order to determine the best options international law can offer.
I sadly need to remind you that the United Kingdom is not a part of the European Union since January 2021. But for every problem, a solution: our specialized lawyers at OLN can advise you on estate planning in the United Kingdom, Continental Europe and Hong Kong!
September 2021
Further to my previous article “Proposed Changes to the Profit Requirement for Main Board IPO” published in May 2021 (the “Article”), The Stock Exchange of Hong Kong Limited (“Stock Exchange”) published the consultation results shortly after the publication of the Article.
To recap, the Stock Exchange published a consultation paper in November 2020 (“Consultation Paper”) proposing to increase the profit requirement for Main Board IPO listing applicants. The Stock Exchange proposed 2 options for the increase, one proposing to increase the overall profit requirement by 150% of the current profit requirement (“Option 1”) and the other proposing to increase the overall profit requirement by 200% (“Option 2”).
Noting that some companies with a proposed small market capitalization at the time of application that might not be able to meet their profit forecast post-listing and the concerns raised by respondents to the Consultation Paper on the proposed increase in Main Board profit requirements, the Stock Exchange adopted a profit increase which is neither Option 1 nor Option 2. The new profit requirement adopted by the Stock Exchange is a modified version of Option 1 and Option 2 (“Modified Profit Requirement”), being HKD35 million for the most recent financial year prior to the listing application and HKD45 million in aggregate for the 2 preceding financial years, representing a 60% increase from the current profit requirement and a change in the profit spread from 60%:40% to 56%:44%. With the Modified Profit Requirement, the implied historical P/E ratio drops from 25 times to 14 times. The Stock Exchange is also prepared to grant relief from the profit spread under the Modified Profit Requirement in order to allow more flexibilities to listing applicants, on a case-by-case basis. The Modified Profit Requirement takes effect on 1 January 2022.
Although the Modified Profit Requirement is less than Option 1 and Option 2, still with such increase, it will inevitably drive away small size companies who are only marginally able to meet the current Main Board profit requirement. On the other hand, with the Modified Profit Requirement, small market capitalization companies which might otherwise not be eligible for listing on the Main Board under the proposed increase under Option 1/Option 2 can still apply for Main Board listing if they satisfy the new requirement.
In fact, as previously mentioned, the Stock Exchange accepted 102 Main Board IPO listing applications between January and April 2021 since the publication of the Consultation Paper, the number of new Main Board listing applications received by the Stock Exchange between May and August 2021 was 135[2], indicating that even more companies are aiming to take advantage of the last chance to be assessed based on the current profit requirement.
The impact of the Modified Profit Requirement remains to be seen but at least it has the effect of pushing forward the IPO plans of companies with low profits who may not qualify to be listed on the Main Board after the new profit requirement rules come into effect. We can expect to see even more new Main Board IPO applications to be submitted to the Stock Exchange prior to the Modified Profit Requirement coming into effect.
If you wish to learn more about listing in Hong Kong, please feel free to speak to our Simon Wong.
Simon Wong
+852 2186 1848 / +852 9460 9816
simon.wong@oln-law.com
Partner, Corporate & Commercial
Oldham, Li & Nie
September 2021
[1] Consultation Conclusions – The Main Board Profit Requirement
[2] Progress Report for New Listing Applications – Main Board IPO Applications
2021年九月
在「仲裁庭判令附带法庭程序费用的权力」(《香港律师》,2021年6月)一文中,作者认为,由于在附带法庭诉讼中申请临时措施所招致的费用(「附带法庭程序的费用」)不能构成「仲裁程序的费用」,仲裁庭因此不能判给申请方相关费用。
被忽视的法例
我等谨认为,《再谈在仲裁中追讨附带法庭程序的费用》(《香港律师》,2021年4月)阐述的分析尚未被充分理解,而《仲裁条例》第74(3)条亦再次被忽略。
简而言之,《仲裁条例》第74(3)条明确规定,「凡任何一方要求作出命令或指示(包括临时措施),则仲裁庭亦可就该请求……命令一方支付费用」。(作者后加的强调)该条文看来已授权仲裁庭就《仲裁条例》第74(1)条衍生的一般仲裁程序费用以外的费用颁令。
仲裁程序的费用
尽管许多有关其他司法管辖区的文章都曾探讨「仲裁程序的费用」这概念,但这些讨论与《仲裁条例》第74(3)条的诠释并不相关。《仲裁条例》第74(3)条乃是一条由香港立法会议员创造的独特条文,外国法规并无任何同等的条文。
无论如何,前文作者所引用的文献亦指出了某些仲裁庭可以在仲裁中判给「附带法庭程序的费用」的情况。
1.《国际仲裁实务指引》(International Arbitration Practice Guideline)(2006年)中提及,若本地法院无法处理临时措施的费用,或法院已将其提交予仲裁庭决定,则临时措施的费用可能在仲裁中予以追讨。
2. 同样地,Micha Bühler(2018年)接受了只要没有重复判给费用且相关法律程序没有违反仲裁协议,「附带法庭程序的费用」也许可以作为仲裁费用予以追讨。
3. Jeffrey Waincymer教授(2012年)进一步指出,「如果这是胜方用以支持仲裁的附带行为,例如于法院取得临时措施的费用」,该「附带法庭程序的费用」则有可能被视为仲裁费用。
原则上,除非另有明确规定,否则仲裁庭判给「附带法庭程序的费用」的管辖权不应取决于某些事件而定。因此,依我们愚见,这些文献均倾向支持而不是否定仲裁庭确实对判给「附带法庭程序的费用」拥有管辖权的观点。较好的说法应是仲裁庭虽有判给讼费的管辖权,但基于显而易见及不必重复的公共政策原因,这种管辖权只应在极罕见的情况下使用。
务实及可行的商业解决方案
虽然要求外国司法管辖区特别容许仲裁庭判给「附带法庭程序的费用」这主张可能值得推崇,但若这主张与外国司法管辖区预设的讼费原则相反,则并不现实。无论如何,要改变每个外国司法管辖区的常规亦是不切实际的。
依我们愚见,一个简单而可行的解决方案,亦与上述Waincymer(2012年)的学术文献相符,是在仲裁协议中加入讼费弥偿条款,订明「附带法庭程序的费用」可作为损害赔偿予以追讨。
鸣谢
作者感谢梁泳泽律师(高李严律师行合伙人)的研究指导和梁冠衡先生(高李严律师行暑期实习生)的研究投入。任何错误、遗漏和失误都是作者自己的责任。
香港
英国
入息稅 | 物业 收入稅 | 公司利得稅 | 股息稅 | 資产 增值稅 | 土地稅 | 物业 印花稅 | 遗产稅 | |
香港 | 2% – 17% | 净租金收入的15% | 16.5% (正常税率) 8.25% (不超过$2,000,000 的应评税利润) | 沒有 | 沒有 | 差饷: 5% 地租: 3% | $100 – 15% | 2005年7月15日後取消遗产税 |
英国 | 20% – 45% | 物业所得租金收入连同个人 入息计算税款 | 19% (正常税率) | 7.5% – 38.1% (视乎税级) | 10% – 28% (視乎稅級和資產類別) | 市政稅: £1,070.22 – £3,210.66 (2020/21年度) | 0% – 12% | 最高稅率为40% |
A. 全球征税制度 – 英国居民 (Resident) vs 非英国居借居民 (Non-domiciled Resident)
英国居民
非英国居借居民 (Non-domiciled Resident)
B. 香港与英国签订的双边税务条约 (Double Taxation Agreement)
A. 建立 “干净资本” (Clean Capital)
B. 妥善安排每年居英日子
C. 作好资产承继安排
D. 设立信托
联络我们:
Anna Chan 陳韵祺律师 | 合伙人
anna.chan@oln-law.com
Victor Ng 吳光懋律师 | 合伙人
victor.ng@oln-law.com
免责声明:本文仅供参考。本文中的任何内容均不得解释为对任何人提供的英国或香港法律意见或任何与此有关的法律意见。高李严律师事务所对任何人因本文所所载的任何内容而行所造成的任何损失和/或损害不承担任何责任。
by HC Tai
随着科技发展一日千里,「零工经济」近年成为新兴全球趋势。零工经济泛指自由工作者通过在线求职平台转介并获取兼职工作机会,工作性质通常是为某个项目特别而设或临时性质的工作。因应新冠肺炎肆虐和科技高速发展,就业市场产生前所未有的变化,零工经济亦因此应运而生。雇主倾向减低长期员工的比例,并同时增加更多临时/兼职员工,增加灵活性。零工经济的增长也受惠于高速发展的在线平台和电商行业,例如外卖平台和租车平台。银行、零售和信息科技等传统行业亦聘用更多的自由工作者,提高其组织的灵活性。本文将研究自由工作者,或俗称「炒散王」,在目前的法律框架下的权益和定位。
自由工作者在香港的定位
虽然零工经济在香港是一个崭新的概念,但这种特殊的关系仍然由传统的「雇员/自雇」二分法作区分。根据合同的具体条款,自由工作者可以被视为「雇员」,亦可能被视为「判头或自雇人士」。如果自由工作者在法律上被界定为雇员,他将有权享有《雇佣条例》(第 57 章)「EO」、《雇员补偿条例》(第 282 章)「ECO」和《强制性公积金计划条例》(第 485 章)「MPFSO」等法例下的法定权益和保障。
因此,要了解香港法律框架下自由工作者的合法权利,首先必须了解雇员/自雇人士的分别,以及相对应的权益。下表概括了香港法律制度下的自雇人士、固定限期的雇员和无固定限期的雇员在权益上的主要区别:-
自僱人士
|
固定限期的僱員 |
無固定限期的僱員 |
||
性質 |
自僱 |
僱員 |
||
僱傭條例 |
不適用 |
適用 |
||
僱員補償條例 |
不適用 |
適用
|
||
法定僱員福利 – 有薪年假 |
× |
如僱員於連續性合約受僱不少於12個月,僱員將依法享有法定有薪年假 (Part 8A, EO)。
|
||
法定僱員福利 – 疾病津貼
|
× |
如僱員於連續性合約受僱不少於1個月,僱員將依法享有法定疾病津貼 (Part 7, EO)。 |
||
法定僱員福利 – 遣散費 |
× |
如僱員於連續性合約受僱不少於24個月,如 僱員因裁員而遭僱主解僱或被停工,僱員將依法享有遣散費 (Part 5A, EO)。
|
||
法定僱員福利 – 長期服務金 |
× |
如僱員於連續性合約受僱不少於5年,並 (i) 非基於因犯嚴重過失而遭即時解僱或因裁員而遭解僱
|
||
(ii) 向僱主呈交註冊醫生或註冊中醫發出指定的證明書,證明他永久不適合擔任現時的工作,並因健康原因辭職
|
||||
(iii) 65 歲或以上的僱員因年老而辭職
|
||||
(iv) 僱員在職期間死亡;或
|
||||
(v) 有固定期限的僱傭合約,在合約期滿後不獲續約 (如僱主在合約終止日前以書面要求僱 員續訂合約或以新合約重新聘用,僱員不能不合理地拒絕該項要求)
|
||||
法定僱員福利 – 強積金 |
任何人須在成為自僱人士的首60日內自行選擇強積金計劃及開立一個自僱人士帳戶。
|
僱主必須為計劃供款,並從僱員的收入中扣除部分收入作為供款,除非僱員受僱的固定期限少於 60 天。
|
||
終止僱傭合約 |
視乎自僱人士以及網上平台訂立的合約條款
|
僱員或僱主任何一方以通知期或代通知金,終止僱傭合約
|
||
僱主在以下情況,可即時解僱僱員,而無須預先通知或給予代通知金,如僱員在與其僱傭有關的事宜上:
|
||||
僱員在以下情況,可即時終止僱傭合約,而無須預先通知或給予代通知金,如;
|
||||
僱傭合約届滿 |
||||
因工遭遇意外以致身體受傷的損傷的補償
|
× |
如僱員在受僱工作期間因工遭遇意外以致身體受傷,僱主需依法作出賠償 (s5 ECO)。 |
如上表所示,在现行雇佣保障的制度下,大部分的雇佣权益源于「雇员」的身份。大部分的情况下,企业通常希望以自雇人士的方式聘请自由工作者,因为以此形式聘请自由工作者,雇主不需向强积金供款和对雇员承担法定权益,从而节省成本。然而,零工就业是否构成雇员或自雇人士不能一概而论。
根据香港案例,即使雇主于合同以「代理人」、「顾问」、「自由工作者」或「判头」(或其他头衔)称呼雇员,该雇员仍有可能在法律上被界定为「雇员」。除此之外,其他司法管辖区的法院亦曾裁定自由工作者为雇员,从而享有某些雇佣保障和权利。例如,最近英国最高法院一致认为UBER司机为英国雇佣法下的「工人」,因此享有法定最低工资和有薪年假等雇佣权益 (详见Uber BV and others (Appellants) v Aslam and others (Respondents) [2021] UKSC 5)。阿姆斯特丹上诉法院裁定,在线外卖平台 Deliveroo 的外卖员在法律上为雇员;而西班牙巴塞隆那法院亦曾下令Deliveroo需支付 130 万欧元作为雇佣供款。由于上述裁决都是在 2021年颁布的,它们很有可能影响着其他地区的法庭 (包括丹麦、奥地利和瑞典等) 在同类案件中的取态或政府政策,为自由工作者提供更多保障。
香港法院的考慮因素
在香港,雇主与雇员关系视乎个别个案的具体情况而定。香港终审法院于Poon Chau Nam v Yim Siu Cheung [2007] HKCFA 19 作出的判词很有指导性,该案裁定界定雇主与雇员关系需以一个基于就业背景下的整体印象来决定。 在 Tang Chau Yuet v Fu Kin Po [2011] 1 HKLRD 519案中,香港法院裁定在考虑雇佣关系会考虑下列的因素,当中包括: –
(1) 雇主对雇员的控制程度:如果雇员有权自行决定何时、何地或以何种方式工作,雇员倾向被界定为「自雇人士」而不是「雇员」;
(2) 雇员会否自行提供的设备;
(3) 雇员会否自行雇用助手;
(4) 雇员会否自行承担财务风险及其程度;
(5) 雇员在执行任务时有否机会从有效的管理获利;
(6) 雇员承担的投资和管理责任;
(7) 雇员在的雇主组织所担当的角色;
(8) 雇主为雇员承担保险和税收的责任;
(9) 雇员会否在同样行业自行经营业务;
(10) 当事人对自己关系的看法;和
(11) 有关行业或专业的行业做法。
香港法院将如何看待企业与自由工作者的雇佣关系仍有待观察。在这方面,可以参考英国最高法院在 Uber 一案中的判决,法官一致作出以下结论,认定 Uber 司机为英国雇佣法下的「工人」,并强调以下的因素:
(1) 固定报酬——Uber对票价有控制权,并有权根据乘客投诉作出全额或部分退款。
(2) 标准合约条款——Uber司机必须接受Uber订立的标准合约条款。
(3) 限制司机接受乘客的权利——Uber通过控制提供给司机的信息,从而控制司机接受要约的能力,再而监察司机接受和取消要约的比率,作出相对的惩处。
(4) 对车辆类型和平台的控制——提供服务的在线平台由Uber全资拥有和控制
(5) 限制乘客和司机之间的沟通——乘客与司机的沟通被限于提供租车服务。
Uber案的判决仅限于该案的具体情况。即使出现相近的因素,亦可能产生截然不同的裁决。 故此,在线平台、电商或任何打算雇用自由工作者的企业,亦应详细考虑上述的因素,评估他们与自由工作者的雇佣关系。
如果你就上述希望了解更多,欢迎你通过以下信息与我们的合伙人Anna Chan联系。
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
香港中环雪厂街二号圣佐治大厦
五楼503室
请在此处分享您的消息的详细信息。我们会尽快与您联系。