• 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

  • Skadden Recognized by Legal 500 Greater China 2026. 16 December 2025
  • Hong Kong – Hauzen LLP, Basil Hwang And Jay Lee Ranked In FinTech Legal (International Firms) By Chambers And Partners, Rankings Upgraded. 16 December 2025
  • Singapore – Bird & Bird ATMD Advises SuperX On Strategic Investment In NVIDIA Solution Provider MicroInference. 15 December 2025
  • Bird & Bird Advises Cheyne Capital On The Acquisition Of Two Buxton Hotels With Champneys. 15 December 2025
  • Appleby Recognised In Chambers Asia‑Pacific 2026. 15 December 2025

NEWS FEED

    December 16, 2025

    Digital Omnibus Package: Single EU Harmonised Incident Reporting Regime Across Cyber And Data Protection Regime.

    December 16, 2025

    Cyber Security And Resilience Bill: Strengthening The UK’s Digital Defences.

    December 16, 2025

    US – White House Launches National Framework Seeking To Preempt State AI Regulation.

    - Stuart D. Levi - Skadden,
    December 16, 2025

    Philippines – Why Justice Hernando May Yet Be Proven Right.

    - Nilo T. Divina - DivinaLaw,
    December 16, 2025

    Philippines – Health Is wealth, Wealth Is health.

    - Nilo T. Divina - DivinaLaw,
    December 16, 2025

    India – Arif Azim Or Offshore Infrastructures? Analysing SC’s Divergent Takes On Commencement Of Limitation For Section 11(6) Applications.

    December 16, 2025

    India – Are Layering Restrictions Under The Companies Act Constitutionally Valid?

    - Bharat Vasani - Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas,
    December 16, 2025

    India – SEBI’s Final Word On Merchant Bankers Regulations – Notification Of key amendments.

    December 16, 2025

    India – RBI’s Consolidation Drive: One Stop Repository For The ARC Regulatory Framework.

    December 15, 2025

    Finland – Finnish Airline Proposed To Face Fine Of EUR 7.6 Million For Procedural Competition Law Infringement.

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

3/f, 13/F, Two Harbourfront, 22 Tak Fung Street, Hunghom, Kowloon, Hong Kong

social@conventuslaw.com

Terms of use | Privacy statement © 2025 Conventus Law. All Rights Reserved.