• 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

  • Economist Enterprise To Convene More Than 500 Legal Leaders For The 5th Annual General Counsel Summit US: Law In The Age Of Systemic Risk. 3 June 2026
  • Singapore – Bird & Bird ATMD Secures Double Win At ALB Southeast Asia Law Awards 2026. 3 June 2026
  • Bird & Bird Advises LTM On Its Offer To Acquire Randstad’s Technology And Consulting Services Business In Europe And Australia. 3 June 2026
  • US – Crowell & Moring Relocates D.C. Office To Newly Redeveloped Space In Penn Quarter. 3 June 2026
  • US – IAM Ranks Crowell & Moring In Patent 1000 2026. 3 June 2026

NEWS FEED

    June 3, 2026

    How To Write Outside Counsel Guidelines That Govern AI-Assisted Work.

    June 3, 2026

    Important EU Court Judgment Clarifies Rules On Interest Due In Cartel Damages Cases.

    June 3, 2026

    US – California Court Upholds Insurer’s Duty To Defend After Covered Claim Is Dismissed.

    June 3, 2026

    Creating Enforceable NDAs For Singapore SMEs: Best Practices And Pitfalls.

    June 3, 2026

    Singapore – Choice Of Law And Jurisdiction Clauses – Why They Matter In Arbitration.

    June 3, 2026

    Singapore – Kiri Industries Ltd V. Senda International Capital Ltd [2025] SGCA(I) 1.

    June 3, 2026

    Singapore – Key Updates For Businesses And SMEs.

    June 3, 2026

    Excessive Pricing In Kazakhstan’s Aviation Sector: How Should The Competition Authority Investigate?

    June 3, 2026

    New Law Of The Republic Of Kazakhstan “On Banks And Banking Activities” What Has Changed For Foreign Market Participants.

    June 3, 2026

    Kazakhstan – Construction Code Legal Alert Series, Issue 1: Key Structural Reforms.

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.