Kirkland, Latham Among Firms Challenging Hong Kong's Restriction on Foreign Lawyers
The group of firms warned of negative repercussions for Hong Kong's economy and its status as an international financial center if the proposed limitations remain.
October 23, 2018 at 12:17 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
A number of global law firms, including Davis Polk & Wardwell and Kirkland & Ellis, are challenging a series of changes proposed by the Law Society of Hong Kong that could restrict the practice of foreign lawyers, warning that they could result in “colossal negative repercussions” for Hong Kong.
The group, which also includes Latham & Watkins, Paul Hastings, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, and Linklaters, signed a letter to Law Society president Melissa Pang warning that the proposed changes will have “colossal negative repercussions for the economy of Hong Kong and for Hong Kong's status as an international financial center,” according to local newspaper the South China Morning Post.
Last week, Pang informed members of the Law Society in a letter that the organization is considering changes to parts of the Legal Practitioners Ordinance—the main legislation governing the legal profession in Hong Kong—that regulate foreign firms and foreign lawyers in the city.
Foreign lawyers and foreign law firms in Hong Kong are required to register with the Law Society in order to advise on the law of their home jurisdiction or the laws of a third jurisdiction. Foreign lawyers are not permitted to practice or advise on Hong Kong law.
Among the proposed changes, the Law Society is seeking to require firms to have two Hong Kong-qualified lawyers for every foreign lawyer they hire; the local-to-foreign ratio is currently 1:1. The professional body is also concerned with the misconduct where non-Hong Kong-qualified lawyers advise on Hong Kong law matters without the supervision of a locally qualified partner.
The changes will most likely have a bigger impact on firms specializing in Hong Kong listings work, which usually involves a high volume of documentation work and often includes U.S. securities law opinions. Most global firms practicing in the Hong Kong capital markets space give Hong Kong and U.S. law advice under one roof. The change of the local-to-foreign ratio, which could mean having two-thirds of the office's lawyers qualified in Hong Kong, could potentially lead to firms sending lawyers away from Hong Kong.
Only a selected group of international firms were asked to comment during the first round of consultation, which was originally due to close on Nov. 1. Many lawyers were asked to give responses without first seeing what is being proposed, according to several sources that spoke with The Asian Lawyer, Law.com's Asia-based publication.
In response, Pang, who took over in June as the Law Society's first-ever female president, agreed to expand the consultation to all members and extend the deadline to the end of this year.
Pang promised that all Hong Kong solicitors, registered foreign lawyers and trainee solicitors will receive “a full set of consultation documentation including … an explanatory note summarizing the proposed amendments, the purposes and the rationale of the proposed amendments.”
A spokesperson for the Law Society said that if necessary, the organization will “meet members in person to exchange views and to keep a continuing dialogue.”
“We will collate all views of our members and consider them carefully in deciding the next step forward,” she said in an emailed statement.
Related Stories:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllSullivan & Cromwell Signals 5-Day RTO Expectation as Law Firms Remain Split on Optimal Attendance
Eversheds Sutherland Adds Hunton Andrews Energy Lawyer With Cross-Border Experience
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Stevens & Lee Names New Delaware Shareholder
- 2U.S. Supreme Court Denies Trump Effort to Halt Sentencing
- 3From CLO to President: Kevin Boon Takes the Helm at Mysten Labs
- 4How Law Schools Fared on California's July 2024 Bar Exam
- 5'Discordant Dots': Why Phila. Zantac Judge Rejected Bid for His Recusal
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250