Hong Kong Companies Ordinance: Virtual Company Meetings
Companies Ordinance amendments facilitate virtual company meetings
Described by the Securities and Futures Commission (“SFC”) as the “cornerstone of investor protection”, suitability obligations continue to evolve both in terms of the standard of conduct required to comply but also in terms of the cost of failure to comply. With fines in one case tabulated at HK$5 million per failure to comply and both the SFC and the Hong Kong Monetary Authority (“HKMA”) ever keen to promote these obligations, it has never been more important for persons licensed or registered with the SFC to ensure compliance. Arguably, the introduction of new requirements to ensure the suitability of so-called “complex products” represents another step in denying investors the freedom to make their own choices, absolving investors of responsibility for their own choices and imposing advisory duties upon market players whose business models may be non-advisory in nature. These requirements appear to seek to use regulatory means to counter a judicial system that has tended to be less sympathetic to claims of mis-selling.
Please join us for the lunch time seminar as we provide our perspective on the evolving requirements of the suitability obligations and review how regulated firms can minimize the risk of claims of mis-selling in carrying out their business and how they should respond to allegations of mis-selling.
Speakers
Timothy Loh, Managing Partner
Mr. Loh has extensive experience advising SFC regulated firms on all aspects of the conduct of their business and representing such firms not only in proceedings commenced by the SFC alleging misconduct but also in court and arbitral proceedings commenced by clients.
Francis Comtois, Partner
Mr. Comtois is a litigator whose practice includes representing clients in SFC investigations and disciplinary proceedings, the resolution of commercial disputes related to the provision of financial services and white collar criminal proceedings.
Described by the Securities and Futures Commission (“SFC”) as the “cornerstone of investor protection”, suitability obligations continue to evolve both in terms of the standard of conduct required to comply but also in terms of the cost of failure to comply. With fines in one case tabulated at HK$5 million per failure to comply and both the SFC and the Hong Kong Monetary Authority (“HKMA”) ever keen to promote these obligations, it has never been more important for persons licensed or registered with the SFC to ensure compliance. Arguably, the introduction of new requirements to ensure the suitability of so-called “complex products” represents another step in denying investors the freedom to make their own choices, absolving investors of responsibility for their own choices and imposing advisory duties upon market players whose business models may be non-advisory in nature. These requirements appear to seek to use regulatory means to counter a judicial system that has tended to be less sympathetic to claims of mis-selling.
Companies Ordinance amendments facilitate virtual company meetings
SFC cautions virtual asset deposits may be regulated as collective investment schemes
Recent data provide a 5 year snapshot of on-site SFC inspections and suggest a defensive pathway forward for SFC licensed corporations
Find out more about how we can help
Contact UsWe use cookies to enhance your experience of our websites and to enable you to register when necessary. By continuing to use this website, you agree to the use of these cookies. For more information and to learn how you can change your cookie settings, please see our Cookie Policy and our Privacy Notice.