• 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

  • Shortlisted In Four Categories At The ALB Japan Law Awards 2025. 30 May 2025
  • Withers Announces New Chairperson Paul Hewitt. 30 May 2025
  • Indonesia – SSEK Law Firm Partner Joins AmCham Dialogue With Danantara CIO. 30 May 2025
  • Linklaters Advises Dubai Holding On The Landmark REIT IPO Of Dubai Residential REIT. 29 May 2025
  • Linklaters Advises Africa50 On Negotiations For EDF’s Entry Into The Company Dedicated To The Volobe Hydroelectric Dam In Madagascar. 29 May 2025

NEWS FEED

    May 30, 2025

    India – Decoding Patent Infringement: Essential Elements, Equivalents, And Estoppel In Crystal Crop Protection V. Safex Chemicals.

    - Swati Sharma - Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas,
    May 30, 2025

    India – Peppa Pig Has A New Sister! What Should Mummy & Daddy Pig Do About Their Estate Plan?

    - Rishabh Shroff - Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas,
    May 30, 2025

    India – FIG Paper (No. 45 – Series 3) – SEBI Mulls Relaxation Of FPI Norms For Investment In Government Bonds.

    - Anu Tiwari - Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas,
    May 30, 2025

    Consultation Following The Supreme Court’s Decision On The Meaning Of ‘Sex’ In The UK Equality Act.

    May 30, 2025

    SyCipLaw Contributes Philippine Chapter To Chambers Debt Finance 2025 Global Practice Guide.

    May 30, 2025

    Malaysia – MyCC Warns Against Price-Fixing In The Private Healthcare Sector.

    - Anand Raj - Shearn Delamore & Co,
    May 29, 2025

    India – Public Interest Rules Against Injunction Again.

    - DPS Parmar - Lex Orbis,
    May 29, 2025

    Indian Supreme Court Rules On Judicial Powers To Modify Arbitral Awards.

    May 29, 2025

    Netherland – Amending Act Restricted Access Dutch UBO Registers Adopted.

    May 29, 2025

    The Practical Q&A Guide To Cutting-Edge Intellectual Property Issues In China.

Footer

Conventus Law
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Linkedin

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.