• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
Conventus Law

Conventus Law

Conventus Law

  • About Us
  • Channels
    • Jurisdiction Channel
    • Practice Area Channel
    • Industry Channel
    • Business Of Law
    • Law Firms
    • Special Reports
  • Video
  • Events
  • Explore
  • Search
  • Membership
  • Conventus Doc
x
Search

More results...

Generic filters
Home » Special Report » Taking Action Against Shadow Companies In Hong Kong.

Taking Action Against Shadow Companies In Hong Kong.

October 2, 2015

October 2, 2015 by

5 September, 2015 

 

 

Shadow Companies – The Problem
 
A shadow company is a Hong Kong-registered company that uses a famous brand or company name as part of its own name, whilst being totally unconnected to the brand owner.
 
Shadow companies are normally used as fronts to allow individuals behind them to trade off the reputation of a brand owner’s name in the PRC. 

The key elements of a shadow company are:
 
a. it has registered a name which incorporates the name of a well known brand;
b. its director(s)/shareholder(s) are PRC individuals;
c. its company secretary is a secretarial company which will usually incorporate the shadow company and provide its registered office address; and
d. it will authorise a separate PRC entity, which is often connected to the individuals behind the shadow company, to use its name, claiming authorisation from the brand owner.

In our experience, the shadow company will register their registered office address as their place of business with the Inland Revenue so that they have a Business Registration Certificate, giving the illusion they are trading in Hong Kong. 
 
In addition, the shadow company may also apply for a Hong Kong trademark under different classes to those used by the legitimate brand owner. 
 
Shadow companies pose substantial risks of financial and reputational damage to brand owners.

 

What Can You Do As Brand Owner?

 

Taking Action Against Shadow Companies In Hong Kong.

 

The first step would be to send a cease and desist letter to the shadow company demanding they stop infringing your intellectual property rights. The threat of using court proceedings may cause the infringement to cease and the director of the shadow company to change the company name. 
 
If no response is made, the next step would be to issue court proceedings against the shadow company. 
 
Once a writ is issued it is unusual for the shadow company to defend the proceedings. Normally default judgment and an injunction can be obtained within 2 months of proceedings being issued.
 
The last step, after an injunction has been ordered, would be to serve the injunction on the Companies Registry. The Companies Registrar will require the company to change its name within 6 weeks of being informed of the injunction. In the event the director does not change the name of the shadow company the Companies Registrar will arrange for the company’s registered number to be substituted in place of its name. 

CH-CoatedSHlogo_CMYK-withSpace

 

For further information, please contact:

 

Jezamine Fewins, Partner, Stephenson Harwood

jezamine.fewins@shlegal.com

Primary Sidebar

PRESS RELEASES

  • Sidley Advises HJ Science On Its Successful Chapter 18A Listing In Hong Kong. 25 June 2026
  • AI Is Ready But Firms Are Not: How Falling Behind On AI Implementation Is Costing Clients And Talent. 25 June 2026
  • Linklaters Advises Shenzhen Senior Technology Material On Its HK$1.34bn HKEX IPO. 25 June 2026
  • Hong Kong Unlocks New Opportunities With Central Asia. 25 June 2026
  • Hong Kong – Linklaters Advises Well Link Life Insurance On US$200m Tier 2 Subordinated Bond Offering. 25 June 2026

NEWS FEED

    June 25, 2026

    EU – The European Commission’s Tech Sovereignty Proposal And The Move To Digital Deglobalisation.

    June 25, 2026

    Japan – “J-CFIUS” Reforms Are Here — Reshaping Japanese Foreign Investment Control.

    June 25, 2026

    China – A Notable Compliance Guide For Private Securities Investment Funds – Key Takeaways Of Guidance No. 54.

    - XIE, Qing (Natasha) - JunHe, JunHE
    June 25, 2026

    China’s New Outbound Investment Rules: A New Era Of National Security Reviews And Maybe China’s Answer To ‘Reverse CFIUS’.

    June 25, 2026

    Mitigation Of Sanctions Risks In Commerce, Lending And Letter Of Credit.

    June 25, 2026

    Using AI To Strengthen Sales Force Compliance Monitoring In Life Sciences.

    June 25, 2026

    Vietnam – Case Precedent No. 83/2026/Al: Can An Insurer Refuse To Pay Simply Because The Wrongdoer Has Not Yet Been Identified?

    June 24, 2026

    Frontline UK Employment Law Update Edition 45 2026 – Case Updates.

    June 24, 2026

    What In-House Lawyers Need To Do Differently To Stay Effective And Influential In The AI Era.

    June 24, 2026

    India – GIFT City & HFT Regulatory Disputes.

Footer

Conventus Law
  • Linkedin
  • Twitter
  • Facebook

CONVENTUS LAW

  • About Us
  • Explore
  • Video
  • Events
  • Contact Us
  • Jurisdiction Channel
  • Practice Area Channel
  • Industry Channel
  • Law Firms
  • Business Of Law
  • Special Reports

OTHERS

CONVENTUS DOCS
CONVENTUS PEOPLE

Room 1601, 16th Floor,               Wing On Centre, 111 Connaught Road Central, Hong Kong

social@conventuslaw.com

Terms of use | Privacy statement © 2026 Conventus Law. All Rights Reserved.