The Court of First Instance judgment ([2023] HKCFI 2932) is another unsuccessful judicial review against the decision of the Listing Review Committee of The Stock Exchange of Hong Kong Limited to impose disciplinary sanctions on two independent non-executive directors of a listed company.
The Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission’s “Manager in Charge” regime, which aims to heighten senior management accountability within licensed corporations, came into effect in 2017. In a recent disciplinary action, the SFC has reprimanded and fined a licensed corporation HKD 1.75 million and banned its former MIC for Compliance for two months. The Subject LC is licensed under the Hong Kong Securities and Futures Ordinance to carry on Type 9 (Asset management) regulated activity.
The Court of First Instance has recently discussed the Court’s discretionary power in allowing private companies to be carved out from disqualification orders made against former directors of a listed company under s.214 of the Securities and Futures Ordinance (“SFO”). The Court retains discretion in deciding whether exemptions to disqualification orders should be granted in the circumstances. We discuss the principles and key factors considered by the Court in dealing with such carve-out applications below.
“Ramp and dump” or “pump and dump” schemes continue to attract significant press coverage and are an enforcement priority for the Securities and Futures Commission (SFC) in Hong Kong. These schemes do not only have penalties for the fraudsters, but could also have significant implications for SFC-licensed corporations (LCs) who are the gatekeepers for the financial system. Recent statements by the SFC and The Stock Exchange of Hong Kong Limited (SEHK) suggest that the impact of these schemes is not limited to secondary trading and may extend to initial public offerings (IPOs).
In five recent judicial review applications brought against the Securities and Futures Commission (SFC) and the Magistrate (HCAL 2132, 2133, 2134, 2136 and 2137/2018), the Court of First Instance dismissed challenges to the SFC’s decisions to seize and retain digital devices during its search operations. The Court has confirmed the…