We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 15

The Commissioner's power to raise assessment on a new basis after the expiry of the limitation period confirmed by Court of Final Appeal in Aviation Fuel Supply Company
  • Clifford Chance LLP
  • Hong Kong
  • January 16 2015

Further to the decision of the Court of Appeal (CA) in Aviation Fuel Supply Company v Commissioner of Inland Revenue 2013 4 HKLRD 463, which we


International regulatory update - 27 31 October 2014
  • Clifford Chance LLP
  • United Kingdom, USA, Global, Hong Kong, India, Luxembourg, Singapore, South Korea, China, European Union
  • November 4 2014

The European Banking Authority (EBA) has published the results of the 2014 EU-wide stress test of 123 banks. In addition, the European Central Bank


SFC wins first High Court case to wind up a Hong Kong listed company on public interest grounds
  • Clifford Chance LLP
  • Hong Kong
  • March 13 2015

The Hong Kong High Court recently handed down its reasons for ordering on 26 February 2015 that China Metal Recycling (Holdings) Limited ("China


International Regulatory Update 23-27 September 2013
  • Clifford Chance LLP
  • Australia, China, European Union, Germany, Global, Guernsey, Singapore, South Korea, United Kingdom, USA, Hong Kong, Japan, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Russia
  • October 1 2013

The UK government has launched a legal challenge with the European Courts of Justice (ECJ) on the remuneration provisions under the Capital


International mediation guide
  • Clifford Chance LLP
  • Belgium, Brazil, China, Czech Republic, European Union, France, USA, Slovakia, Spain, Turkey, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, Netherlands, Poland, Qatar, Romania, Russia, Singapore, Germany, Hong Kong, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Morocco
  • March 27 2013

We have compiled this Mediation Guide with a view to providing a better understanding Of the differences between jurisdictions in respect of


Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal confirms non-taxability of unrealised gains in trading stock
  • Clifford Chance LLP
  • Hong Kong
  • November 22 2013

Profits tax in Hong Kong under the relevant tax statute, the Inland Revenue Ordinance (the Ordinance), is in general imposed on Hong Kong sourced


A safe haven from which to plan foreign bribes: the lack of extra-territoriality of Hong Kong's anti-bribery laws
  • Clifford Chance LLP
  • Hong Kong
  • August 31 2014

The Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal ("CFA") has confirmed that Hong Kong's much feted anti-graft laws do not apply to conspiracies made in Hong Kong


Hong Kong Court of First Instance case casts spotlight on new Practice Direction on "e-discovery" between parties
  • Clifford Chance LLP
  • Hong Kong
  • August 29 2014

Discovery of electronically created or electronically stored information in civil litigation (e-discovery) is a complex and often costly process. A


Securities and Futures Appeal Tribunal - landmark court of appeal decision
  • Clifford Chance LLP
  • Hong Kong
  • June 16 2011

In a landmark decision, the Court of Appeal unanimously overturned the practice that the Securities and Futures Appeal Tribunal (the SFAT) has adopted since 2003 in only proceeding on the basis that it has a limited role in reviewing Securities and Futures Commission (the SFC) decisions which are appealed to the SFAT


SFAT awards costs against the SFC
  • Clifford Chance LLP
  • Hong Kong
  • March 29 2011

In a recent decision by the Securities and Futures Appeal Tribunal (SFAT) in respect of an application for costs, SFAT No. 2 of 2010, the SFAT has determined that the applicant should be compensated by an award of costs in his favour against the Securities and Futures Commission (SFC), where the SFAT found, on an application for a review of the penalty (not findings of misconduct) that the SFC's proposed penalty was manifestly excessive, and the application was therefore successful