• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
location icon香港中環雪厰街二號聖佐治大廈五樓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
  • 繁
    • ENG
    • 简
    • 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
  • 關於
        • 獎項與排名
        • 企業社會責任
  • 專業服務
        • 加拿大公證服務
        • 中國事務
        • 香港僱傭法和商業移民法律服務
        • 破產法
        • 爭議解決
        • 投資基金
        • 公證服務
        • 長者法律服務
        • 家事法
        • 保險
        • 私人客戶 – 遺產規劃和遺囑認證
        • 商業詐騙和資產追踪
        • 人身傷害法
        • 稅務諮詢部
        • 中國委托公証服務
        • 知識產權法
        • 金融服務監管部
        • 日本事務
        • 公司和商業法
        • Startups & Venture Capital
        • 法國事務
        • 合規、調查和執法
        • 加拿大公證服務
        • 中國事務
        • 家事法
        • 知識產權法
        • 香港僱傭法和商業移民法律服務
        • 保險
        • 金融服務監管部
        • 破產法
        • 私人客戶 – 遺產規劃和遺囑認證
        • 爭議解決
        • 人身傷害法
        • 日本事務
        • 投資基金
        • 稅務諮詢部
        • 商業詐騙和資產追踪
        • 公證服務
        • 法國事務
        • 公司和商業法
        • Startups & Venture Capital
        • 長者法律服務
        • 中國委托公証服務
        • 合規、調查和執法
  • 律師團隊
  • 最新消息
  • 辦事處

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
  • 加入我們
  • 專業服務
  • 律師團隊
  • 我們的歷史
    • 獎項與排名
    • 高李嚴律師行的企業社會責任
  • 所獲獎項
  • 標準服務條款
  • 聯繫我們
  • 評價
  • 評語
  • 辦事處
  • 關於我們
  • 高李嚴律師行
  • 高李嚴律師行和社區
  • 關於
        • 獎項與排名
        • 企業社會責任
  • 專業服務
        • 加拿大公證服務
        • 中國事務
        • 香港僱傭法和商業移民法律服務
        • 破產法
        • 爭議解決
        • 投資基金
        • 公證服務
        • 長者法律服務
        • 家事法
        • 保險
        • 私人客戶 – 遺產規劃和遺囑認證
        • 商業詐騙和資產追踪
        • 人身傷害法
        • 稅務諮詢部
        • 中國委托公証服務
        • 知識產權法
        • 金融服務監管部
        • 日本事務
        • 公司和商業法
        • Startups & Venture Capital
        • 法國事務
        • 合規、調查和執法
        • 加拿大公證服務
        • 中國事務
        • 家事法
        • 知識產權法
        • 香港僱傭法和商業移民法律服務
        • 保險
        • 金融服務監管部
        • 破產法
        • 私人客戶 – 遺產規劃和遺囑認證
        • 爭議解決
        • 人身傷害法
        • 日本事務
        • 投資基金
        • 稅務諮詢部
        • 商業詐騙和資產追踪
        • 公證服務
        • 法國事務
        • 公司和商業法
        • Startups & Venture Capital
        • 長者法律服務
        • 中國委托公証服務
        • 合規、調查和執法
  • 律師團隊
  • 最新消息
  • 辦事處
asialaw Profiles 2023

OLN獲新發佈的《亞洲法律概況2022/23年度排名》高度推薦

Test Blog

OLN獲新發佈的《亞洲法律概況2022/23年度排名》高度推薦

September 16, 2022 by OLN Marketing

我們很高興地宣布,高李嚴律師行再次獲得《亞洲法律》的高度推薦。

《亞洲法律概況2022/23》認可本行在以下業務領域的專業知識:

  • 爭議解決 – 高度推薦
  • 企業併購 – 推薦
  • 知識產權 – 推薦
  • 勞工及僱傭 – 推薦
  • 私人客戶 – 推薦
  • 重組與破產 – 值得關注

高李嚴律師行還於以下行業被推薦:

  • 保險 – 推薦
  • 消費品及服務 – 值得關注
  • 科技及通訊 – 值得關注

《亞洲法律》亦認可本行的合夥人在各自的業務領域中獲得排名:

  • 高國峻 被公認為爭議解決方面的業界資深律師
  • 李卓賢 被公認為爭議解決方面的卓越律師
  • 葉琳寶 被公認為公司企業和商業法方面的卓越律師
  • 宋靜妍 被公認為知識產權方面的卓越律師
asialaw Profiles 2023

關於《亞洲法律》

《亞洲法律概況》是唯一一份全面分析亞洲地區和國內律師事務所以及該地區頂尖律師的法律名錄。

概況於每年 9 月在線上發佈,而今年的排名為23 個司法管轄區(從孟加拉到越南)以及 28 個行業和業務領域提供律師事務所和律師推薦。

Filed Under: Oln, 最新消息

仲裁員的披露責任:模糊不清的法律救濟

August 18, 2022 by OLN Marketing

(本文於《香港律師》二零二二年八月期刊發表)

在Halliburton Company v Chubb Bermuda Insurance Ltd [2020] UKSC 48一案中,英國最高法院認為,仲裁員有法律責任披露可能掩蓋其公正性的事實和情況。此判決被譽為釐清了有關仲裁員利益衝突的英國法律,但令人費解的是,法庭卻未有實際制裁備受挑戰而又未能履行其披露責任的仲裁員。

本文將審慎研究由賀知義勳爵宣判的英國最高法院一致裁決。作者將論證,第一,披露責任的理論根源並不穩妥。其次,訂定披露責任儘管有助提高國際仲裁的透明度,但如沒有任何實際後果,只會落得毫無意義。本文將指出有關辭呈機制和擬議制裁的邏輯缺陷。我等謹認為,英國最高法院應採用明確測試:無法履行披露責任的仲裁員應被免職,並向仲裁方提供救濟 。

背景

2010年墨西哥灣井噴事故導致Deepwater Horizon鑽油臺遭受破壞。與其他涉事方達成了11億美元的和解協議後,Halliburton根據其責任保險單向Chubb展開仲裁,尋求彌償。在雙方未能就第三名仲裁員的委任達成協議下,英國高等法院在經抗辯的聆訊後委任了Kenneth Rokison QC 為仲裁員。Rokison隨後在 Halliburton 不知情的情況下獲任命為另外兩宗與 Deepwater Horizon 事件相關的仲裁程序的仲裁員。Halliburton發現後,對Rokison的公正性提出質疑,並根據Arbitration Act 1996(「1996年《仲裁法》」)第24(1)(a)條要求免職 。

英國最高法院裁定,仲裁員有一項「次要」的法律責任披露任何可能影響其獨立性或公正性的情況。賀知義勳爵認為,這法律責任蘊含於1996年《仲裁法》第33條,而其規定仲裁員在仲裁程序中必須公平公正地行事。賀知義勳爵認為只有仲裁員作出強制披露,才能夠履行其法定公正責任,以及委任合同中相應的隱含條款 。

應用上述法律原則,英國最高法院同意仲裁共同方確實可於重疊的仲裁程序中先測試其案件強弱,從而於餘下仲裁程序取得優勢,故仲裁員有責任披露任何相關任命,以消除表面偏頗的印象。然而,仲裁員沒有披露也不代表會自動被免職。這極其量只構成一個考慮因素。儘管Rokison確實沒有遵從披露責任,剝奪了Halliburton在仲裁程序中異議的機會,從而損害了仲裁的公平性,但英國最高法院平衡各因素後裁定Rokison無需請辭 。

使人困惑的理論根源

首先,披露責任法理上的先天缺陷剝奪了其任何獨立存在的可能性。披露責任據稱的根源為以 1985年《聯合國貿法會國際商事仲裁示範法》(《聯合國示範法》)條文為藍本的1996年《仲裁法》。為了跟上仲裁界不斷演變的標準和期望,1996年《仲裁法》刻意省略任何關於披露責任的條文 。英國最高法院如此對1996年《仲裁法》第33條的重新解釋,不僅顯得與立法原意不符,更使披露責任有名無實。一個較少爭議的主張,又不把披露責任從屬於公正責任,可能是基於必要性和公共政策考慮將其隱含在委任合同中(Haywood v Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2018] UKSC 22, [32])。下文將進一步闡述,若英國議會採納了《聯合國示範法》第12條,法定救濟亦理應存在的。

空有法律責任而沒有救濟:鼓勵仲裁員明知故犯

英國最高法院判決中最明顯的不足,是未有因應仲裁員違反披露責任而提供周全的救濟。英國最高法院於決定仲裁員是否應出任該職位時,樹立了雙重標準:

1.       如果尋求任命的仲裁員未能獲得仲裁共同方同意,向非共同方就相關仲裁作出必要的披露,該仲裁員自然應拒絕任命;

2.       相反,若然仲裁員明知故犯,在披露自己已出任相關仲裁程序的仲裁員前已接受任命,則除非法庭發現偏頗,該仲裁員也不會被免職 。

換言之,英國最高法院無法提供任何制裁(或誘因 )來阻止仲裁員接受不應接受的任命。共同仲裁員在相關任命中出現偏頗的風險不應被低估。仲裁方在有關連的仲裁程序中藉指定同一位仲裁員以獲得「內幕信息」的情況並不罕見(例如Beumer Group UK Ltd v Vinci Construction UK Ltd [2016] EWHC 2283)。保密訴訟與生俱來的是缺乏公眾的監督和一致的裁決標準,如果法院無法有效執行披露責任,該責任無異於無牙老虎。Rokison絲亳無損地脫身,正正揭示了披露機制現存的漏洞,本應為強制的機制卻淪為自願性質。

被削弱的阻嚇力

另一議題是針對違反披露責任的兩項提議法律制裁能否起到威懾作用,並提供足夠救濟。賀知義勳爵首先指出,當主體事宜接近需要披露的界線,即合理第三者會斷定不披露將構成看似偏頗,則不披露本身已足以構成對該仲裁員公正性的合理懷疑,使其被免職。不過這實際只複述了錯綜複雜的偏頗測試,沒有提供任何獨立的救濟予仲裁方。

其次,當沒有披露的主體事宜被裁定屬嚴重,但不披露本身不構成偏頗,仲裁員可被命令承擔自己的辯護費用及/或提出異議一方的費用。然而,賀知義勳爵引用了1996年《仲裁法》第29條,質疑對失當仲裁員提出個人申索的可能性。第29條的字眼甚廣:除非出於惡意,否則「仲裁員無須為在履行或充作履行其職能時所作或疏忽的任何事情負責」。驟眼看來,如果這條文適用,它亦會防止任何針對仲裁員作出的訟費命令,因為訟費命令亦是一種個人責任。我等謹認為,第29條在此並不相關。首先,披露責任於仲裁員上任前已出現,而任何個人責任豁免權只於此後生效。其次,因不披露而產生的任何責任與仲裁員(充作)履行其職能無關。

若違反責任理應有法律上的回應,公平的補償至少應是該失當仲裁員退還迄今收到的所有報酬,並補償仲裁方在仲裁程序中試圖將其免職而虛耗的訟費。儘管如此,可惜的是Rokison沒有受到任何制裁,不禁令人嚴重質疑上述處罰的可用性。再者,即使Rokison受到法律制裁,於這迂迴曲折的程序中,訟費亦難以充分補償無辜的仲裁方,故確有迫切需要訂定更全面的救濟。

可得的救濟

如上所述,依我等愚見,披露責任應為一項獨立存在的責任,不從屬於公正責任。此外,正如Lady Arden指出,違反披露責任即違反背後的委任合同。英國最高法院應有多種普通法的救濟從Halliburton的困境中把其拯救出來。如仲裁員違反委任合同中如此的隱含責任 ,則仲裁方應可終止合同並要求賠償,正如其他司法管轄區中類似的裁決(見1993年5月12日1996 Rev. Arb. 411, at 411巴黎大法院的判決)。失當的仲裁員亦可能因作出失實陳述而容許仲裁方撤銷委任合同。在適當的情況下,恰當地履行披露責任可為委任合同其中一個先決條件,在條件發生之前,雙方不會受到合同約束,從而消除了任何法律不確定性。

若Halliburton一案發生於香港,《仲裁條例》(第 609 章)第 25 條中申請仲裁員迴避的法定機制則可能派上用場。迴避可從兩方面提出:偏頗或不具備各方當事人約定的資格。「資格」一詞,既未有在法規中定義,亦未有於《聯合國示範法》的注釋說明中解釋。按該詞自然和通常的含義,其意義為一種使某人適合特定工作或活動的特質(《牛津詞典》),自應包括提供全面並如實披露的責任。因此,即使在沒有出現任何偏頗情況下,法院也可以僅因為仲裁員違反披露責任,將失當仲裁員免職。

結論

恕我們直言,英國最高法院對Halliburton案的判決引起的疑問多於其解答的問題。法院沒有充分依據下,訂立了仲裁員的法律披露責任,卻沒有就違反責任而提供週全救濟。法院所提出有限甚或空洞的救濟亦缺乏建設性,尤其是法院沒有盡用現存所有的合同救濟來補償因仲裁員未有履行披露責任而受害的仲裁方。法院的任務是在公正和公平的程序中彰顯各方的利益,故我等希望法院能夠於適當的時候糾正這個裁決。

鳴謝

作者感謝高李嚴律師行合夥人梁泳澤 (Dantes Leung) 律師的研究指導。作者承擔全部錯誤及遺漏的責任。

Filed Under: Oln, 爭議解決, 最新消息

Intellectual Property for Social Media Influencers

August 2, 2022 by OLN Marketing

88% of Hong Kong population is using social media, and this number is growing every minute. It is no surprise that social media has become a lucrative business. Social media influencers (“Influencers”) or key opinion leaders (“KOLs”) are popular and powerful – they create tight bonds with their followers and have the ability to influence their perceptions of brands and hence their spending behaviours. As a result, they are now an important marketing channel for many local and foreign brands. Influencers partner with these brands and generate income by way of endorsement or other forms of support through their profiles on Instagram, WeChat, Facebook, YouTube, TikTok, and other social media networks.

Influencers and KOLs build up and grow their reputations and market values by creating original contents, where multiple intellectual property rights may subsist, that should be managed properly to preserve and maximize their values. At the same time, Influencers and KOLs may overlook the potential risk of infringing others’ intellectual property rights when creating their posts and articles given their contents often ride on photographs and videos officially released by the leading brands in the market which carry protectable intellectual property rights.

Why influencers and KOLs should be concerned about intellectual property rights (“IPR”) of themselves and others?

Intellectual property rights infringements on the internet, unfortunately, are common. If trade mark and copyright are protected with registration, it is easier to enforce them in the event of a dispute, as compared to unregistered rights.

Registration of intellectual property rights makes it clear to others that they are protected. This helps to avoid plagiarism – if other influencers know that the content is protected, they won’t in the first place replicate the content.

Registered intellectual property rights give a social media account more credibility – followers and brands find the contents more trustworthy and risks free.

What types of intellectual property should influencers register?
Copyright

Copyright protects the original influencer’s works of authorship: photographs, videos, posts, art, sound recordings, and other types of content. The social media influencer or KOL is the owner of the content that he / she creates, and can freely distribute, make copies and commercially exploit the original works. Others must get permission or license before using such copyrighted contents unless a legal based exception, such as “fair use”, applies.

In Hong Kong, it is not necessary to register a copyrighted work as the copyright subsisting therein automatically arises upon the creation of an original work. Having said that, from the perspective of enforcement, the social media influencer may wish to register or deposit a copyright work if it is of significant value in the event it is stolen by a third party.

Trademark

Trademark is a design, logo, phrase or any graphic representation that differentiates one brand from the others in the marketplace. The personal name or nick name of the social media influencer or KOL is the brand name that should be property protected by trade mark registration to preserve and generate its value.

Website domain

The website domain in itself does not carry an intellectual property right yet the domain name usually contains a word, a name or a phrase forming the brand name of the social media influencer or KOL which can be registered as a trade mark.

Intellectual property policies of different social media platforms
  • Facebook: Intellectual Property policy
  • Instagram: Intellectual Property policies
  • TikTok – Intellectual Property policy
  • Twitter – Trademark policy Copyright policy 
  • WeChat – Acceptable Use Policy
  • YouTube – Copyright Centre
The future of protecting intellectual property on social media

To grow exposure and reputation, social media influencers or KOLs often create different types of original contents which are highly susceptible to legal risks. With the internet evolving at such a fast pace, we anticipate infringement of IP right in social media online platforms will increase taking new and more sophisticated forms. Hence, it is imperative for social media influencers and KOLs to be more cautious and proactive to protect their original works going forward. It should not be taken for granted that because nothing bad has happened so far and therefore they will continue to be safe going forward.

It is also important to respect others’ IP rights and not to replicate others’ contents without prior permission.

If you would like to know more about protecting social media influencers or KOLs’ intellectual property rights, please contact us.

Disclaimer: This article is for reference only. Nothing herein shall be construed as legal advice, whether generally or for any specific 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.

Filed Under: Oln, 知識產權法, 最新消息

The Succession of Digital Assets: NFTs, Cryptocurrency or Online Accounts

July 20, 2022 by OLN Marketing

There has been an increase of wealth distributed in various forms of digital assets or platforms.  For example, NFTs, cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin or Ethereum or even online social media or gaming accounts may have substantial value in them. Investment is no longer restricted to its traditional forms, leading to the emergence of many alternative assets investments, most of which are done on an anonymous basis.

To consider how to plan the succession of digital assets, it would be useful to distinguish between digital assets that are transferable and those that are non-transferable.

Transferable Digital Assets

Transferable digital assets include cryptocurrency, NFTs, funds kept in online accounts such as Alipay or WeChat pay.  These can generally be passed down by including provisions in a will. Most countries may treat them the same as any traditional assets (such as bank accounts or real estate property) and require a form of grant of representation to access the digital assets. 

Some companies may even provide the feature on their software platform whereby the user can designate an individual as an emergency contact to receive the data in the user’s account under conditions specified by the user, such as upon the user’s death or incapacity. This feature would potentially allow an executor or trustee nominated in the user’s will (if there is one) to gain access to valuable personal, financial and business information after the user’s death even before presenting an authenticated grant of probate to the company, as well as to act on such information for the benefit of the user’s next generation pursuant to the will.  For example, Apple has a policy known as Legacy Contacts where the person who is set as a Legacy Contact can access photos, messages, notes (but not passwords, music, subscriptions, etc.) with just the access key generated when the Legacy Contact was set and the death certificate.

Given the popularity of digital assets, popular trading platforms for cryptocurrency and other digital assets already have some form of structured policy for dealing with account holders who have passed away.  Some trading platforms have adopted the traditional requirements of dealing with any other physical asset, i.e. requiring beneficiaries to provide the grant of representation, death certificate and other supporting documents to allow access into the deceased person’s account, whilst other platforms give their users options to complete their know-your-client procedure which allows the platform to identify the person using the account, and therefore assist beneficiaries in accessing such accounts.

However, as currently there is no uniform standard on how to pass on digital assets, the best and simplest method is to make sure your beneficiaries are able to find out not only what digital assets you own.  Importantly, and due to the highly secured and encrypted nature of digital assets such that a form of password or key is required to access the assets, it may be important to store such passwords in a safe place but also make your beneficiaries aware of how to access such passwords and keys.

Non-transferable Digital Assets

Non-transferable digital assets are usually digital assets that are licensed for personal use, but not owned in a legal sense.  These include email accounts, social media handles and accounts or mobile app accounts and information contained therein. These generally cannot be passed down simply by a will and may require non-conventional estate plans.

Despite the personal nature of these non-transferable Digital Assets preventing them from being passed down, it is possible to preserve these in accordance with the wishes of the deceased person.  For example, Instagram offers a service known as “memorialising” the deceased person’s account, which allows the memorialized account to be kept as if it was frozen in time.  Facebook offers a further service that allows the person to designate a legacy contact to manage the memorialized account to a certain extent (such as writing a pinned post to share a final message or to update the profile picture, but not allowing removing or changing past posts etc.).  YouTube also provides an estate planning service known as Inactive Account Manager, which allows the person to designate who should have access to the information or whether the account should be deleted.  Otherwise, individuals may need to go through hoops of customer service and in the end not even be able to access any personal or important information.

Inheritance tax considerations

Digital assets (in particular cryptocurrencies) can fluctuate in value rapidly.  In Hong Kong, where estate duty has been abolished, this generally does not create any concern.  However, digital assets may also be based in other jurisdictions that impose inheritance tax, and therefore the applicable jurisdiction of the digital asset or the company through which the digital assets are held before investing in such should be given consideration and taken into account when conducting estate planning.

Conclusion

With diversified forms of valuable assets and technological advancements offering new solutions to asset succession and security, individuals face more considerations than ever in wealth protection and succession.  It is highly recommended that a legal framework should be carefully planned to ensure their wealth can be preserved free from unwanted interference.

Disclaimer: This article is for reference only.  Nothing herein shall be construed as legal advice, whether generally or for any specific 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.

Filed Under: Oln, 私人客戶 – 遺產規劃和遺囑認證, 最新消息

Last-Minute Tax Planning before Migrating from / Temporarily Moving Out of Hong Kong

June 7, 2022 by OLN Marketing

Tax consideration, while an essential and integral part for any migration planning,  is unfortunately often neglected part or left till the last minute, likely because Hongkongers have been too used to or sometimes even “spoiled” by the simple and low tax system in Hong Kong. The hard reality, however, is that the popular emigration destinations such as the UK and Canada adopt a more complex and heavier tax system, the concept of which is alien to most Hongkongers.

What are the top last-minute tips for pre-immigration tax planning?

Destination countries’ tax rates are generally much higher than those of Hong Kong. To avoid tax “disappointment”, tax planning might efficiently minimize your tax exposure. Many of the tax-saving moves, however, can only be done while you are still a Hong Kong tax resident. It is thus advisable to allow sufficient time before your actual departure to consult tax lawyers.  The more preparation time you allow, the more you can achieve. If you are leaving in a rush and only last-minute planning could be done, we would suggest that you at least go for the following:

Updating Current Market Value of existing investment

Unlike Hong Kong, most destination countries impose tax on residents’ worldwide income, meaning that even your investment gains generated in a foreign location (i.e. Hong Kong) could be subject to local tax. This led to much concern by Hongkongers as many of them accumulated wealth via land appreciation of their real estate investment in Hong Kong. The gains could potentially be subject to worldwide tax. The good news is that most of these destination countries do not retrospectively tax the gains before the person becomes its tax resident on the condition that one could prove that the gains were generated while he/ she was still a Hong Kong tax resident. For those migrating to Canada and the UK, this would usually mean sufficient record to show the current market value of the investment, such as surveyor reports immediately prior to entrance of destination countries. For those migrating to the US, it should be noted that such valuation exercise (or what is known as the “Step-up in basis” in the US) cannot be done by a nominal way and must be associated with real transactions.

Executing Will for Hong Kong assets

Inheritance tax could be as high as 40% in the UK which is quite an astronomical figure for Hongkongers since estate duty in Hong Kong has been abolished from 2006 onwards. While there is no inheritance tax in Canada per se, in effect the tax exists because the CRA charges on one’s gain at the time of his/ her death by regarding the event as deemed disposition of one’s assets. The Hong Kong Will allows you a possible argument that Hong Kong remains your place of domicile and thus no estate duty should be imposed. The argument is especially strong if you are only a tax resident of the UK but have not acquired domicile there (i.e. a UK non-dom).

For those who wish to continue employment and receive salaries from Hong Kong, will their salaries be subject to tax in their new country of residence?

The UK and Canada both tax their residents on worldwide income, which means that any revenue, including rental income from HK property, salaries from HK employment, will be subject to local taxes.

Relief is, however, available thanks to the Double Tax Agreements (“DTA”) between Canada and Hong Kong. Under the DTA, Canadian tax residents (with dual residency in Hong Kong) will only be subject to taxation in Hong Kong on salaries deriving from a Hong Kong employment or profits from a business carried on in Hong Kong. Further, for withholding tax on dividends, that will generally be limited to a maximum of 15%.

As for the UK, a resident not domiciled in the UK (referred to as “non-dom”) may also benefit from special taxation rules on foreign-sourced income. However, British citizens returning to the UK cannot claim this “non-dom” status.

Many people left HK in a rush amid the recent Covid-19 outbreak merely temporarily to stay away from the pandemic. Many of them are under Hong Kong employment contracts. Are there any tax implications for them and their employers?

An employee staying in another country for too long may be unintentionally construed as tax resident of that country solely due to the number of days he/she stays there. We have a client who originally intended to pay a short visit to Canada only but turned out staying there for a year due to sudden outbreak of Covid and travel restriction. In usual circumstance, a continuous stay of over 183 days in a tax year in Canada would be deemed tax resident there and thus subject to worldwide tax. Certainly, Covid was a peculiar external factor. We were of the view that given the existence of other factual patterns, client does have an arguable defence to resist the suggestion that he was a Canadian tax resident.

Private companies should also pay close attention if there are HR arrangement in place allowing employees to work from another country while under a Hong Kong employment. Activities done by the employees in such foreign countries might unintentionally be construed as the companies having presence/ establishment there. If such activities generate much profit for the companies, the employers might even potentially be subject to local corporate taxes where the employees work. It is always advisable to consult your tax advisers if in doubt.

OLN provides a range of migration, corporate restructuring and tax advisory services.  If you have any questions on the above, please contact us.

Disclaimer: This article is for reference only.  Nothing herein shall be construed as legal or tax advice, whether generally or for any specific 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.

Filed Under: Oln, 稅務諮詢部, 最新消息

Copyright (Amendment) Bill 2022 gazetted for LegCo reading on 8 June 2022

May 31, 2022 by OLN Marketing

The Copyright (Amendment) Bill 2022 (https://www.legco.gov.hk/yr2022/english/brief/citbcr070928_22020525-e.pdf) was gazetted last Friday after the 3-month public consultation. A very aligned view of IP practitioners and stakeholders is to have the new Copyright provisions enacted as law without any further delay. 

The key 5 legislative proposals are:
 
1. To introduce an exclusive technology-neutral communication right for copyright owners in light of technological developments;
 
2. To introduce criminal sanctions against infringements relating to the new communication right;
 
3. To revise and expand the scope of copyright exceptions to allow use of copyright works in certain common Internet activities; facilitate online learning and operation of libraries, archives and museums; and allow media shifting of sound recordings, etc;
 
4. To introduce “safe harbour” provisions to provide incentives for online service providers to co-operate with copyright owners in combating online piracy and to provide reasonable protection for their acts; and
 
5. To introduce two additional statutory factors for the court to consider when assessing whether to award additional damages to copyright owners in civil cases involving copyright infringements.

The Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development will introduce the Bill into LegCo for first and second readings on June 8. The LegCo Panel on Commerce and Industry supports the legislative proposals. The new Copyright law is expected to launch for the summer!

Filed Under: Oln, 知識產權法, 最新消息

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 10
  • Page 11
  • Page 12
  • Page 13
  • Page 14
  • 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

香港中環雪厰街二號聖佐治大廈
五樓503室

電話 +852 2868 0696 | 電郵我們
關於 律師團隊 辦事處 OLN IP Services 私隱政策
專業服務 最新消息 加入我們 OLN Online
關於 專業服務 律師團隊 最新消息 辦事處
加入我們 OLN IP Services OLN Online 私隱政策
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}
聯絡我們

請在此處分享您的訊息的詳細資訊。我們將盡快與您聯繫。

    x