• 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

  • Linklaters Advises Adidas On Successful €500m Bond Issuance. 28 May 2026
  • Germany – Linklaters Advises On €1.4bn Long-Term Financing Platform For Thyssengas. 28 May 2026
  • Vietnam – THE LAM LAW LLC Recognized As “Best International Arbitration Law Firm – HCMC 2026”. 28 May 2026
  • Crowell & Moring Represents Kanders & Company In Acquisition Of Ginkgo Bioworks’ Biosecurity Business. 27 May 2026
  • US – Crowell Secures $23.3 Million Jury Verdict Ffor C3.ai In Major Trade Secret Case. 27 May 2026

NEWS FEED

    May 28, 2026

    Promoting Transparency In Indonesia’s Job Market Governance: A Closer Look At Mandatory Job Vacancy Reporting Obligations.

    - Stephen Igor Warokka - SSEK,
    May 28, 2026

    World Cup 2026 Ticketing And EU Competition Law: The Consumer Protection Complaint That May Re-Shape The Industry.

    May 28, 2026

    China – New Rules On Supply Chain Security And Measures To Counter Extraterritorial Jurisdiction.

    May 28, 2026

    China – Regulatory Scrutiny And Unwinding The Red-Chip Structure.

    - Angela Wang - Angela Wang & Co.,
    May 28, 2026

    India – Failure To Examine Process Claims Leads Delhi High Court To Remand Matter To The Patent Office.

    - DPS Parmar - Lex Orbis,
    May 28, 2026

    China – CSRC Issues Derivative Trading Administrative Measures.

    - XIE, Qing (Natasha) - JunHe, JunHE
    May 28, 2026

    Client Update – PFAS Regulation In Singapore And Its Implications For International Traders.

    - Dr Joseph Chun - Shook Lin & Bok, Shook Lin & Bok
    May 28, 2026

    Making Administration Conversational With RelativityOne And Claude.

    May 28, 2026

    Vietnam – “Subrogation Right” In Maritime Cargo Claims.

    May 27, 2026

    Cleaner In, Useful Out: The Maturing Sustainability Stack For UK Data Centres.

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.