• 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

  • Konexo Retains Its Band 1 Position In The Chambers And Partner Global Newlaw (ALSP) Guide. 15 July 2026
  • India – The New Buy-back Playbook: Easing Capital Exits Without The Merchant Banker Safety Net. 15 July 2026
  • US – Supporters To Hold July 30 Prayer Vigil For Crosley Green Ahead Of Parole Decision. 15 July 2026
  • US – Steve Raptis, Prominent Policyholder Coverage Attorney, Joins Crowell & Moring. 15 July 2026
  • Linklaters Advises On 51WORLD’s Placing Of New H Shares On HKEX. 14 July 2026

NEWS FEED

    July 15, 2026

    India – A Welcome Reform Under The Jan Vishwas Act, 2026: Relief To Inventors And Applicants For Non-Compliance With Foreign Filing Licence Provisions.

    - Manisha Singh - Lex Orbis,
    July 15, 2026

    India – Delhi High Court Grants Ex-Parte Ad-Interim Relief Against Rogue Fantasy Gaming Platform For Trademark And Copyright Infringement.

    - Manisha Singh - Lex Orbis,
    July 15, 2026

    India – Non-Consideration Of Written Submissions Is Sufficient Ground To Remand Patent Application: Delhi High Court Decides.

    - DPS Parmar - Lex Orbis,
    July 15, 2026

    What Business Stakeholders Actually Need From Their In-House Legal Team.

    - Sacha Kirk - Lawcadia,
    July 15, 2026

    What Your Law Firm Invoices Are Actually Telling You.

    - Sacha Kirk - Lawcadia,
    July 15, 2026

    US – Amici Rally Behind Liberty Global, Urging Tenth Circuit To Rein In Economic Substance Doctrine.

    July 15, 2026

    US – Department Of War Immediately Suspends CMMC Phase II Requirements, Launches 60-day Reform Review.

    July 15, 2026

    Hong Kong – Navigating He-Said-She-Said Disputes In The Arbitration.

    - Angela Wang - Angela Wang & Co.,
    July 15, 2026

    Singapore – Letters Of Intent V MOU V Contracts: Which One Do You Actually Need?

    July 14, 2026

    India – Delhi High Court Examines Commercial Use Of Social Media Platform’s Music Library In Copyright Dispute.

    - Manisha Singh - Lex Orbis,

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.