Hong Kong firms poised to advise on PRC law in China as liberalisation gathers pace
Hong Kong law firms are set to discover whether they will be permitted to advise on PRC law in China in a new special economic zone under development in the south of the country. The Law Society of Hong Kong has submitted proposals to the mainland authorities asking for Hong Kong firms to be allowed to advise on the ground in China by setting up joint ventures with mainland outfits in the new Qianhai Special Economic Zone (SEZ), which is due for completion in 2020. It is expecting a decision within the next two months. The proposals state that Hong Kong firms should be allowed to tie up with mainland Chinese firms based in the Guangdong province to form new joint entities, which in turn could offer a one-stop shop for legal services for Chinese clients.
July 11, 2013 at 07:03 PM
4 minute read
Lawyers welcome plans to allow HK firms to operate in China through tie-ups with mainland outfits
Hong Kong law firms are set to discover whether they will be permitted to advise on PRC law in China in a new special economic zone under development in the south of the country.
The Law Society of Hong Kong has submitted proposals to the mainland authorities asking for Hong Kong firms to be allowed to advise on the ground in China by setting up joint ventures with mainland outfits in the new Qianhai Special Economic Zone (SEZ), which is due for completion in 2020. It is expecting a decision within the next two months.
The proposals state that Hong Kong firms should be allowed to tie up with mainland Chinese firms based in the Guangdong province to form new joint entities, which in turn could offer a one-stop shop for legal services for Chinese clients.
The new rules, if accepted, would also apply to the local branches of most international firms operating in the region. In order to set up a local base, partners are required to be Hong Kong qualified with a minimum of two to five years' post-qualification experience in the city.
Acceptance of the proposals would be a huge step forward in the liberalisation of the Chinese legal market, which currently bans foreign law firms from advising on PRC law on the ground in China. The rules have so far prevented international firms from fully tapping into the world's second largest economy, despite there being no such restrictions on Chinese law firms in the US and Europe.
"We've not had the green light from the Government yet, but we have our fingers crossed," said Stephen Hung, vice president of the Law Society.
"Hong Kong firms could not work alone – [the proposal is that] a Hong Kong firm and a mainland firm merge and set up a new office where they will share expertise. And it would have to be a firm in Guangdong."
The Qianhai SEZ is a $45bn (£30bn) project under development near Shenzhen, adjacent to Hong Kong in the south of China. The zone is one of several purpose-built areas aiming to boost trade between Hong Kong and mainland China, and to test the liberalisation of the PRC market.
Should the new rules be approved, Hong Kong lawyers can expect to receive training on PRC law through continual professional development courses, taught in modules. It is currently unclear when or where the training would take place, but it is expected that Tsinghua University in Beijing, which is a partner in the scheme, could play a role through its affiliate school in Shenzhen.
In addition to relaxing restrictions on law firms, the SEZ is also expected to enable Hong Kong banks to lend renminbi directly to mainland companies, a practice also currently not permitted.
Partners at international law firms have embraced the move to open up the China market.
Freshfields Asia managing partner Robert Ashworth said: "We have been closely following developments in relation to the Qianhai cooperation zone for some time and believe that the proposals, if implemented in the manner expected, could present a valuable option for providing legal services on the mainland. Once the rules come into effect we would certainly explore what opportunities this could offer us."
Baker & McKenzie Hong Kong, PRC and Vietnam managing partner Paul Tan said his firm would also look at tie-up opportunities as and when the rules come into law.
"If PRC law capability were permitted, global firms would be able to take a more holistic approach and offer clients legal advice that meets international standards while complying with local regulations. The overall legal costs to the clients are also likely to be reduced. We will certainly explore any opportunity within the framework permitted by law."
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
© 2024 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 AllAshurst Beijing Chief Representative Leaves for New York Boutique Sterlington
Baker McKenzie, Norton Rose & Other Top Litigators Foresee Rise in AI, Data & ESG Disputes
Axiom-Ince: SFO Charges Five, Including Former Head, Following Investigation
3 minute readSDT Upholds SLAPP Claim Against Osborne Clarke Partner Advising Nadhim Zahawi
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1GC Pleads Guilty to Embezzling $7.4 Million From 3 Banks
- 2Authenticating Electronic Signatures
- 3'Fulfilled Her Purpose on the Court': Presiding Judge M. Yvette Miller Is 'Ready for a New Challenge'
- 4Litigation Leaders: Greenspoon Marder’s Beth-Ann Krimsky on What Makes Her Team ‘Prepared, Compassionate and Wicked Smart’
- 5A Look Back at High-Profile Hires in Big Law From Federal Government
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