In many cases, yes. The place where you got married is usually not the main issue. What matters far more is whether Hong Kong has jurisdiction, whether the marriage is legally valid, and whether Hong Kong is the right forum to deal with the practical consequences of the divorce.

For couples with links to several countries, getting this answer right at the start matters. Filing in the wrong place – or filing too slowly – can create avoidable disputes over forum, cost, timing, and financial outcome.

Family Law

The short answer

If your marriage was validly celebrated in the country where it took place, Hong Kong can generally deal with the divorce if the Hong Kong court has jurisdiction. In other words, a wedding in London, Bali, Tokyo, Bangkok, Vancouver, or anywhere else does not automatically force you to divorce there.

Equally, the fact that your spouse is a foreign national does not by itself prevent a Hong Kong divorce. Nationality is not the deciding issue. The real questions are whether Hong Kong can hear the case and whether Hong Kong is the sensible place to resolve the divorce.

When does Hong Kong have jurisdiction?

Hong Kong courts can hear divorce proceedings if at the date of filing, either spouse is domiciled in Hong Kong, has been habitually resident in Hong Kong throughout the previous three years, or has a substantial connection with Hong Kong.

This is why a Hong Kong passport or Hong Kong identity card alone does not always end the enquiry. A person may be a Hong Kong permanent resident but no longer consider Hong Kong their home. On the other hand, a non-Hong Kong spouse may still be able to rely on Hong Kong domicile because the family’s real and long term centre of life is here. If it is not clear to the Hong Kong courts whether they have jurisdiction, they may ask for further clarification and explanation.

Does it matter that the marriage happened in a third country?

Usually, no – provided the marriage was valid where it was celebrated and you can prove it. That proof normally starts with the original marriage certificate or a certified true copy.

For cross-border couples, document housekeeping matters more than many people expect. If the marriage certificate is in a foreign language, further evidential steps may be needed. If the certificate has been lost, the case can become more cumbersome. The key practical point is simple: before talking strategy, make sure the marriage can be evidenced cleanly.

What about the one-year rule?

In Hong Kong, a divorce normally cannot be started until the parties have been married for at least one year. For many couples this is straightforward, but it still catches people out – especially where there has been a quick overseas marriage followed by a rapid breakdown in Hong Kong.

So even if the marriage was abroad, and even if both spouses are now in Hong Kong, you still need to check that this threshold has been met before filing.

High Net Worth Divorce in Hong Kong: Asset Protection & Prenups for UHNWIs

What else should you check before deciding to file in Hong Kong?

Jurisdiction is only the first filter. International couples should also think about whether another country may also be available, whether there is a risk of competing proceedings, whether children or major assets are located overseas, and whether any Hong Kong order will be easy to enforce where the other spouse or the assets are based.

In practice, the right answer is often not “Can Hong Kong handle this?” but “Should we start in Hong Kong, or somewhere else?” That is a forum question, and it can have major consequences for finance, children, timing, and legal spend.

Common misconceptions

One common misunderstanding is that you must divorce in the same country where you married. That is often wrong.

Another is that only two people from Hong Kong can divorce in Hong Kong. Also wrong. Many Hong Kong divorces involve foreign spouses, expats, or marriages celebrated outside Hong Kong.

A third is that international couples should simply file wherever it feels easiest. That can be risky. In cross-border family cases, the first strategic move often shapes the rest of the case.

Why this matters for business owners and internationally mobile families

For founders, executives, and professionals with cross-border lives, a divorce is not just about ending the marriage. It can affect overseas property, company interests, bonuses, deferred compensation, bank accounts, trusts, and future maintenance exposure.

That is why the “married overseas” question should not be treated as an admin point. It is the doorway to a much larger analysis about forum, disclosure, and financial risk.

Conclusion

If you are linked to Hong Kong but married abroad, there is a good chance Hong Kong may still be able to handle the divorce. The place of marriage is usually not the controlling issue. The real questions are whether the marriage was valid, whether Hong Kong has jurisdiction, and whether Hong Kong is the best place to resolve the case.

The earlier you review those questions, the better your options usually are.

How TITUS Can Help

If your marriage has an international angle – such as a foreign spouse, an overseas wedding, or assets in multiple countries – TITUS can help you assess whether Hong Kong is the right place to start and what that choice may mean for the next stage of the case.

Contact TITUS

The post Can You Divorce in Hong Kong If You Married Overseas? A Guide for International Couples appeared first on Titus.

Most “fund formation” pain is not legal theory. It’s execution.

The structure looks fine on a diagram, but then:

– bank onboarding stalls,

– counterparties ask basic questions no one prepared for,

– approvals are unclear,

– records are scattered,

– and the fund becomes unmanageable as soon as it gets busy.

This is what we mean by a “bankable” structure: a fund or private investment vehicle that can be explained, evidenced, and operated cleanly year after year.

If you’re exploring a Hong Kong structure, start with our Investment Funds practice page:

—

The 3 pillars of bankability

Pillar 1: A control story that makes sense (who can do what)

Banks and counterparties want to know:

– who has authority to instruct movements of money,

– who approves investments and disposals,

– what internal approvals exist (and whether they’re documented),

– how conflicts are handled.

This is governance, not “legal decoration”.

If you’re structuring a holding stack, our Corporate & Commercial practice often supports this layer:

Pillar 2: Records that exist before you need them

When onboarding or a review happens, you don’t get time to build records retroactively.

In practice you need:

– an approvals log (what was approved, when, by whom),

– an investor onboarding pack (CDD, declarations, source-of-wealth/source-of-funds support),

– clean accounting cadence (monthly/quarterly),

– audit readiness.

If regulatory mapping is relevant, our Regulatory practice can help:

Pillar 3: Asset and cash safekeeping mechanics (especially for OFCs)

If you’re using an OFC, custody and safekeeping design is central to whether the structure works.

Start with:

—

The “Bankable Structure Checklist” (forwardable to clients)

1) Governance Pack

– structure chart (entities + roles)

– signatory matrix (bank + internal approvals)

– delegated authority rules (what management can do without board approval)

– conflicts policy

– template minutes / written resolutions

2) AML & onboarding narrative pack

– source-of-wealth/source-of-funds narrative that matches the structure

– supporting documents organised and consistent

– investor classification approach (where relevant)

3) Operational cadence

– monthly bookkeeping rhythm

– quarterly governance review

– annual audit timeline

– compliance calendar (filings, renewals, registers)

—

Why this is where TITUS × IMSG becomes a better partner model

Many firms can draft documents.

Fewer firms help clients keep the structure clean and credible over time.

TITUS supports legal formation and operating documentation for funds:

Our sister team – IMSG supports the operating layer that keeps structures “alive”:

– company secretarial and filings,

– accounting/tax coordination,

– internal controls and reporting rhythm,

– practical readiness for banking and counterparties.

—

Which vehicle is easiest to keep bankable?

It depends on facts, but broadly:

– HoldCo + SPVs: simplest operationally if governance is designed properly.

– LPF: bankable when roles/records/authority are tight.

– OFC: bankable when custodian + investment manager sequencing is done early.

If you’re choosing, start here:

 Hong Kong Funds & Private Investment Vehicles guide

—

Next step: quick call with our Principal

If you want to discuss a client fact pattern or your firm’s recurring needs, we can set up a quick Zoom call with Michael Titus (Principal, TITUS): https://titus.com.hk/our-people/michael-titus/

Send 2–3 time slots to us via:
Email: info@titus.com.hk, or
Whatsapp: +852 9702 3003

—

Disclaimer: This article is for general information only and does not constitute legal advice. Specific advice should be sought for your particular circumstances.

RELATED READING

– Pillar guide: Hong Kong Funds & Private Investment Vehicles guide

– LPF guide: LPF (Limited Partnership Fund) guide

– OFC guide: OFC (Open-Ended Fund Company) guide

– DIPN 61 (plain English): DIPN 61 explained (Unified Fund Exemption)

The post How to Build a “Bankable” Hong Kong Fund or Private Investment Vehicle (AML, Records, Controls) appeared first on Titus.

“0% carried interest” is one of the most misunderstood headlines in Hong Kong funds marketing.

The reality is more nuanced:

– there is a carried interest concession regime,

– it has effective dates and conditions,

– and it’s designed to reward genuine asset management activity with real substance and governance.

If you’re considering a Hong Kong fund platform, start here:

—

What is “carried interest” (plain English)?

In private equity and similar strategies, carried interest is typically the performance-linked share of profits allocated to the manager/sponsor after certain return thresholds.

This is different from:

– management fees (recurring fees for running the strategy), and

– ordinary investment returns (returns to investors).

—

The headline: 0% profits tax (but only if you qualify)

Hong Kong introduced a carried interest concession regime via legislation enacted in 2021, and the HKMA has issued guidelines on certification of funds under the relevant schedule for the carried interest tax concession.

Practical takeaway:

“0%” is not automatic. It is condition-based.

—

Why this matters for structuring

A carried interest regime affects:

– how you draft the fund’s waterfall,

– how you document “qualifying persons” and services,

– whether the operating model and governance actually match the intended regime.

This is where tax, legal documentation and operations must align.

—

Common pitfalls

Pitfall 1: assuming “LPF = 0% carry”

Vehicle choice alone is not the full analysis. The operating and qualifying conditions matter.

Pitfall 2: substance is treated as an afterthought

If you’re building a Hong Kong platform, operational substance and governance hygiene are not optional.

Pitfall 3: documents don’t match reality

If your waterfall, employment arrangements, approvals and reporting don’t align, you create avoidable risk.

This is also why we stress bankable structures and clean controls:

 How to build a “bankable” Hong Kong fund (AML, records, controls)

—

How TITUS + IMSG helps clients implement this properly

TITUS supports:

– structuring and documentation (including carry/waterfall mechanics),

– fund formation and operating agreements,

– regulatory mapping where required.

Our sister team – IMSG supports:

– operational setup and maintenance,

– governance cadence,

– accounting/tax coordination and record hygiene.

If you want to explore whether this is relevant to your strategy, start here:

—

Next step: quick call with our Principal

If you want to discuss a client fact pattern or your firm’s recurring needs, we can set up a quick Zoom call with Michael Titus (Principal, TITUS): https://titus.com.hk/our-people/michael-titus/

Send 2–3 time slots to us via:
Email: info@titus.com.hk, or
Whatsapp: +852 9702 3003

—

Disclaimer: This article is for general information only and does not constitute legal advice. Specific advice should be sought for your particular circumstances.

RELATED READING

– Pillar guide: Hong Kong Funds & Private Investment Vehicles guide

– DIPN 61 (plain English): DIPN 61 explained (Unified Fund Exemption)

– LPF guide: LPF (Limited Partnership Fund) guide

– Bankable structures playbook: How to build a “bankable” Hong Kong fund (AML, records, controls)

The post Hong Kong Carried Interest Tax Concession: When “0% Profits Tax” Applies (and What You Must Get Right) appeared first on Titus.

DIPN 61 is the Inland Revenue Department’s “Departmental Interpretation and Practice Note” explaining how it interprets and applies Hong Kong’s profits tax exemption for funds (often called the “unified fund exemption”).

If you are advising a fund manager or a private capital group operating in Hong Kong, this note matters—not because it guarantees an outcome, but because it signals how the IRD views key concepts and conditions.

If you want help applying this to a specific structure, start here:

—

What DIPN 61 is (and what it isn’t)

DIPN 61 is:

– IRD guidance on interpretation and application of the funds profits tax exemption regime.

DIPN 61 is not:

– a blanket promise that “funds pay zero tax”,

– a substitute for analysing facts, activities, and structure design.

—

Why people search “DIPN 61” in the first place

Typically, the question behind the search is:

“Can my fund (or private investment platform) operate in Hong Kong without creating unexpected profits tax exposure?”

In practice, the answer depends on:

– whether you meet the definition of “fund” for the relevant provisions,

– the nature of transactions,

– who carries out or arranges transactions,

– how the structure is operated in real life.

—

Three common misconceptions

Misconception 1: “If it’s a fund, it’s automatically exempt”

Not necessarily. The regime is condition-based and fact-driven.

Misconception 2: “Domicile solves everything”

DIPN 61 makes clear the regime is intended to cover privately offered funds operating in Hong Kong, whether domiciled inside or outside Hong Kong—subject to conditions. Domicile is not the only variable.

Misconception 3: “We’ll deal with tax after launch”

This is where problems start. If documents, operations and governance don’t match, you create unnecessary risk.

That’s also why we push “bankable structure” thinking early:

 How to build a “bankable” Hong Kong fund (AML, records, controls)

—

Practical takeaway: how to use DIPN 61 in real structuring work

We typically use DIPN 61 as part of a larger “design pack”:

– define whether the structure is truly operating as a fund,

– map how transactions are sourced, executed and documented,

– ensure agreements reflect actual operations,

– design governance and record-keeping so you can evidence reality.

If you’re still choosing between LPF vs OFC vs a holding/SPV stack, read:

 Hong Kong Funds & Private Investment Vehicles guide

—

Next step: quick call with our Principal

If you want to discuss a client fact pattern or your firm’s recurring needs, we can set up a quick Zoom call with Michael Titus (Principal, TITUS): https://titus.com.hk/our-people/michael-titus/

Send 2–3 time slots to us via:
Email: info@titus.com.hk, or
Whatsapp: +852 9702 3003

—

Disclaimer: This article is for general information only and does not constitute legal advice. Specific advice should be sought for your particular circumstances.

RELATED READING

– Investment Funds practice: Investment Funds practice page

– LPF guide: LPF (Limited Partnership Fund) guide

– OFC guide: OFC (Open-Ended Fund Company) guide

The post DIPN 61 Explained (Plain English): Hong Kong’s Profits Tax Exemption for Funds (“Unified Fund Exemption”) appeared first on Titus.

An OFC is often described as Hong Kong’s “corporate-style” fund vehicle. That’s true—but it’s also the reason OFCs require more upfront sequencing than many clients expect.

For private OFCs, two topics decide whether your structure works in real life:

1) investment manager setup, and

2) custody/safekeeping design.

If you’re still choosing between LPF vs OFC vs a holding/SPV stack, start here:

Hong Kong Funds & Private Investment Vehicles guide

—

What is an OFC (in plain English)?

An OFC is a fund vehicle in corporate form that can be set up as:

– a single OFC, or

– an umbrella OFC with sub-funds (ring-fenced compartments).

It’s often used when corporate governance optics, share-based ownership, or umbrella/sub-fund structuring are desirable.

—

The investment manager issue (plan early)

For OFCs, the investment manager setup is not an afterthought.

The SFC’s OFC Code notes that an OFC is required to have an investment manager and that the investment manager is required to be licensed/registered for Type 9 regulated activity. 

If you need help mapping this in practical terms, our Regulatory practice can help:

—

Custodian requirements: what “safekeeping” really means

A custodian is mandatory and must be approved by the SFC is required for setting up the OFC pursuant to the SFC’s OFC Code. For private OFCs, the SFC’s OFC Code includes an appendix setting out “Requirements for safekeeping of private OFC scheme property”, and notes that custodians of private OFCs should comply with those requirements.

In practice, “custody” affects:

– which asset types you can hold cleanly,

– how cash movements are controlled,

– what audit trail exists,

– whether banking and counterparties view the structure as credible.

If your custodian choice does not match the asset strategy, OFC implementation becomes painful.

—

Practical compliance design (what you should build before launch)

We recommend designing these upfront:

1) Operating procedures

– subscriptions/redemptions (even private vehicles need clean mechanics)

– valuation cadence and method (especially for illiquid assets)

– dealing day rules (if any)

– conflicts policy and approvals

2) Governance pack

– board approvals matrix

– signatory matrix (bank instructions + internal controls)

– minutes/resolutions templates

– reporting cadence and escalation rules

3) Record-keeping and audit trail

If you can’t evidence decisions and money movement cleanly, you get friction:

– with banks,

– with auditors,

– with investors (even “friendly” ones),

– and in disputes.

This is exactly why “bankable structure” thinking matters:

 How to build a “bankable” Hong Kong fund (AML, records, controls)

—

OFC vs LPF: which is typically simpler?

– LPF is usually simpler for closed-end private funds with partnership economics:

– OFC can be compelling where corporate form, umbrella/sub-fund structure, or share mechanics are important—assuming you can sequence the investment manager and custodian properly.

—

Common pitfalls we see (and how to avoid them)

Pitfall 1: “We’ll decide the custodian later”

This usually backfires. Custody drives operations, documentation, audit trail and bank narrative. Most importantly, the SFC requires every OFC to appoint a custodian.

Pitfall 2: mismatched documents vs reality

Offering docs say one thing. The operating team does another. That gap is where problems start.

Pitfall 3: treating OFC like a normal company

An OFC is a fund vehicle; it requires fund-grade operational hygiene.

—

How TITUS + IMSG supports private OFCs

TITUS supports fund formation and operating documentation, including:

– investment management/advisory arrangements

– administration arrangements

– custody arrangements

– fund-related corporate transactions

(See our Investment Funds practice page: https://titus.com.hk/investment-funds/)

Our sister team – IMSG supports ongoing operational running:

– company secretarial + filings

– accounting/tax coordination

– reporting cadence and record hygiene

– practical “bankability” support

—

Next step: quick call with our Principal

If you want to discuss a client fact pattern or your firm’s recurring needs, we can set up a quick Zoom call with Michael Titus (Principal, TITUS): https://titus.com.hk/our-people/michael-titus/

Send 2–3 time slots to us via:
Email: info@titus.com.hk, or
Whatsapp: +852 9702 3003

—

Disclaimer: This article is for general information only and does not constitute legal advice. Specific advice should be sought for your particular circumstances.

RELATED READING

– Pillar guide: Hong Kong Funds & Private Investment Vehicles guide

– LPF guide: LPF (Limited Partnership Fund) guide

– DIPN 61 (plain English): DIPN 61 explained (Unified Fund Exemption)

– Bankable structures playbook: How to build a “bankable” Hong Kong fund (AML, records, controls)

The post The Open-Ended Fund Company (OFC) in Hong Kong: Custodian Requirements & Ongoing Compliance (Private OFCs) appeared first on Titus.

If you’re advising a family, founder, or private capital group with Asia exposure, “just set up an entity” is rarely the hard part. The hard part is building a structure that is:

• legally coherent,
• operationally clean, and
• explainable to banks and counterparties.

This guide is a practical overview of the most common Hong Kong options—how to choose between them, and where deals typically go wrong. If you want to speak to our team about a specific fact pattern, start with our Investment Funds practice page here: Investment Funds practice page

The quick map: LPF vs OFC vs HoldCo + SPVs

Option 1: Holding company + SPVs (the “private investment platform” for most families)

Best when you want a straightforward private investment vehicle to hold assets (portfolio investments, operating companies, property SPVs, co-invest positions) without running a fund-style subscription/redemption model.

Typical characteristics:

– one HK holding company (or a small stack),

– SPVs per asset or strategy,

– governance rules (approvals, signatories, reporting cadence) designed upfront.

Option 2: LPF (Limited Partnership Fund) — private fund-style wrapper

Best when the vehicle behaves like a private fund:

– pooled capital,

– multiple investors (even a small “club”),

– private equity / venture / credit-style economics,

– partnership governance and distribution mechanics.

Read our full LPF guide:

Option 3: OFC (Open-ended Fund Company) — corporate fund wrapper

Best when you want a corporate form fund structure, often with:

– share issuance/redemption mechanics,

– umbrella/sub-fund thinking,

– a compliance design that is closer to institutional fund governance.

Read our full OFC guide:

—

“Why Hong Kong?” — reasons advisers can use without sounding like a brochure

Hong Kong remains a practical Asia hub for private capital structures because it combines:

– a mature legal and professional ecosystem,

– common-law familiarity (helpful for international advisers),

– proximity to Asia capital and banking infrastructure, and

– a growing set of fund-related regimes and guidance.

From a legal-services perspective, the biggest “why” is still execution: if the structure needs to operate with Asia banking, Asia counterparties, and multi-jurisdictional family governance, Hong Kong is often a workable centre of gravity.

(If you’re comparing Hong Kong structures or you’re setting up a fund platform, our team can help you scope the right path here: https://titus.com.hk/investment-funds/)

—

The five questions that decide the structure (90% of the time)

1) Is it really a “fund” — or just a private holding platform?

If investors pool money and a manager runs the strategy, you’re in fund logic. If it’s a family/founder investment platform, a HoldCo/SPV stack may be cleaner.

2) Do you need subscriptions/redemptions (open-ended behaviour)?

If yes, OFC becomes more relevant. If no (closed-end), LPF or HoldCo/SPVs are often more natural.

3) How many investors are there (and how sophisticated)?

A family-only vehicle often prioritises operational simplicity. A club/co-invest vehicle often benefits from LPF mechanics and clearer partner rights.

4) What does the bank need to see?

If your structure can’t be explained and evidenced, onboarding stalls. That’s why “bankability” is not a footnote.

(We cover this in detail here: /bankable-hong-kong-fund-structures-aml-controls/)

5) Are you aiming for any Hong Kong fund tax regimes?

If your vehicle is truly operating as a “fund” and meets the relevant conditions, Hong Kong’s profits tax exemption guidance becomes relevant. Start with our plain-English note:

 /dipn-61-hong-kong-profits-tax-exemption-for-funds/

—

Typical timelines (realistic planning)

Every case differs, but these are the planning ranges we see most often:

– HoldCo + SPVs: usually fastest legally; banking and operational setup often drives the real timeline.

– LPF: manageable once key roles are lined up and the LPA terms are clear.

– OFC: more sequencing-heavy; custodian and investment manager decisions should be made early.

—

Common pitfalls (and how to avoid them)

Pitfall 1: building a “paper structure” that doesn’t match real life

If actual control is different from what documents say, problems appear in banking, audits, disputes, and exits.

Pitfall 2: choosing the vehicle before defining governance

The structure should follow the governance plan (who approves what, who can sign, what reporting is required).

Pitfall 3: ignoring the operational layer

Entity maintenance, accounting/tax coordination, record-keeping, and approval logs are what keep the structure alive.

Our Corporate & Commercial practice often supports the “holding and governance” side of these projects:

Our Regulatory practice supports compliance and risk mapping when the facts require it:

—

How TITUS typically supports these structures (the “HK desk” model)

TITUS supports legal design and implementation:

– vehicle selection (LPF vs OFC vs SPVs),

– formation documentation and agreements,

– fund formation and operating documentation,

– regulatory mapping where needed,

– transactions, restructurings, and dispute planning.

Our sister company – IMSG supports the running of the structure:

– company secretarial and filings,

– accounting/tax coordination,

– ongoing operational cadence (records, approvals, reporting),

– practical “bankability” support.

If you’re exploring Hong Kong for a client, start here:

—

Next step: quick call with our Principal

If you want to discuss a client fact pattern or your firm’s recurring needs, we can set up a quick Zoom call with Michael Titus (Principal, TITUS):

Send 2–3 time slots to us via:
Email: info@titus.com.hk, or
Whatsapp: +852 9702 3003

—

Disclaimer: This article is for general information only and does not constitute legal advice. Specific advice should be sought for your particular circumstances.

RELATED READING

– LPF guide: https://titus.com.hk/the-limited-partnership-fund-lpf-in-hong-kong-a-complete-guide/

– OFC guide: https://titus.com.hk/the-open-ended-fund-company-ofc-in-hong-kong-what-you-need-to-know/

– DIPN 61 (plain English): https://titus.com.hk/dipn-61-hong-kong-profits-tax-exemption-for-funds/

– Carried interest (0% profits tax): https://titus.com.hk/hong-kong-carried-interest-tax-concession-0-profits-tax/

– Bankable structures playbook: https://titus.com.hk/bankable-hong-kong-fund-structures-aml-controls/

The post Hong Kong Funds & Private Investment Vehicles: A Practical Guide for Families, Founders and Private Capital (2026) appeared first on Titus.

At TITUS, we often see SMEs and startups focus heavily on partnership agreements and intellectual property, while overlooking a critical vulnerability: mental incapacity. If a key decision-maker loses the ability to manage their affairs due to illness or accident, business operations and family finances can grind to a devastating halt.

This is where an Enduring Power of Attorney (EPA) becomes your most vital safety net.

What is an Enduring Power of Attorney (EPA)?

Under the Enduring Powers of Attorney Ordinance (Cap. 501), an EPA is a legal document that allows you (the “Donor”) to appoint one or more persons (the “Attorneys”) to take care of your financial matters.

The “Enduring” Difference: Unlike a General Power of Attorney—which becomes invalid after 12 months generally or at the moment you lose mental capacity—an EPA is specifically designed to endure that incapacity. It ensures that your trusted representatives can continue to manage your property and finances exactly when you need them most.

Important Note: In Hong Kong, an EPA only covers financial and property matters. It does not cover healthcare or lifestyle decisions.

Who Needs an EPA?

While often associated with the elderly and dementia planning, an EPA is a strategic tool for:

• SME & Startup Founders: If you are the sole signatory for business accounts or the primary decision-maker, an EPA ensures your business stays afloat—paying staff, suppliers, and rent—if you are temporarily or permanently incapacitated.
• Property Owners: For those with real estate investments, an EPA allows your Attorney to manage leases, mortgage payments, or sales.
• Family Breadwinners: Ensure your spouse and children have immediate access to funds for daily living and medical expenses without waiting months for court intervention.

How Does It Work? The Process in Hong Kong

Creating a valid EPA is a formal process that requires strict adherence to statutory requirements.

1. Prescribed Form: You must use the specific legal forms as set out in Cap. 501A.
2. Medical & Legal Certification: To ensure you have the capacity to sign, the document must be witnessed by:
   • A registered medical practitioner in Hong Kong.
   • A practising solicitor in Hong Kong.
   • Note: Both must be present, though the law allows for a 28-day gap between the doctor’s and solicitor’s signatures in certain circumstances.
3. Registration: The EPA must be registered with the Registrar of the High Court. While it can be registered early, it must be registered once the Donor becomes (or is becoming) mentally incapacitated before the Attorney can exercise full powers.

Why “Doing It Yourself” is Risky

The Hong Kong courts are incredibly strict regarding EPAs. A single technical error in the witnessing process or the wording of the “Authority” section can render the entire document void. Without a valid EPA, your family might have to go through rounds of clarification or even apply for Committeeship under the Mental Health Ordinance—a process that is notoriously expensive, public, and can take over a year to finalize.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

1. Can I appoint my spouse and my business partner as Attorneys? Yes. You can appoint them to act “Jointly” (must mutually agree on everything) or “Jointly and Severally” (can act independently). 

2. Can an EPA be used to make medical decisions for me? No. In Hong Kong, an EPA is strictly for financial and property affairs.

3. Does an EPA take away my control while I am still healthy? Not necessarily. You can specify in the document that it only becomes effective upon a specific date or when a doctor certifies your incapacity.

4. Is an EPA the same as a Will? No. A Will only takes effect after death. An EPA is for the protection of your interests while you are alive but unable to speak for yourself. An EPA will be revoked on the death of the donor.

5. How much does it cost to set up an EPA? While there are legal and medical fees involved, they are a fraction of the cost of the court proceedings required if you don’t have one.

Secure Your Future with TITUS

At TITUS, we specialize in the intersection of business and private client law. We don’t just “fill out forms”; we provide a comprehensive risk management strategy for SME owners and families.

Protect your business. Protect your family. Contact us today (or send us a message here)for a confidential consultation on setting up your Enduring Power of Attorney.

Disclaimer: This blog post provides general information only and does not constitute legal advice. For specific legal issues or concerns, please consult with a qualified legal professional.

The post Securing Your Legacy: A Guide to Enduring Powers of Attorney (EPA) in Hong Kong appeared first on Titus.

While every individual has the legal right to pursue compensation for loss or injury, a demand for payment is not the same as a legal obligation to pay.

Understanding how compensation claims actually work under Hong Kong law is the first step in protecting yourself.

1. The Right to Claim vs. the Duty to Pay

Hong Kong’s legal system allows any person who believes they have suffered loss, injury, or damage to:

• Send a letter of demand
  
• Initiate civil proceedings
  
• Seek monetary compensation
  

This right of access to justice is fundamental.

However, the burden of proof always lies with the claimant.
They must show, on the balance of probabilities:

• A legal duty existed
  
• That duty was breached
  
• The breach caused actual loss
  
• The compensation amount is reasonable and supported by evidence
  

Without satisfying these legal elements, a claim will not succeed in court—no matter how strongly it is worded.

2. Why Some Claims Appear “Unreasonable”

Many people feel pressured to settle quickly after receiving a legal letter.
Common reasons include:

• Fear of court proceedings
  
• Concern about legal costs
  
• Misunderstanding of legal responsibility
  
• Aggressive wording in demand letters
  

In reality, a demand letter is only the beginning of a legal process, not the final decision.

Hong Kong courts carefully assess:

• Medical evidence
  
• Financial documentation
  
• Causation between incident and loss
  
• Proportionality of the claimed amount
  

If a claim is exaggerated or unsupported, the court may:

• Reduce the compensation
  
• Dismiss the claim partially or entirely
  
• Award costs against the claimant
  

3. How the Civil Claim Process Works in Hong Kong

Understanding the process removes much of the fear.

Step 1 — Letter of Demand

The claimant (or their lawyer) requests payment.
You are not automatically required to pay at this stage.

Step 2 — Negotiation or Pre-Action Communication

Parties may exchange:

• Evidence
  
• Liability and quantum arguments
  
• Settlement proposals
  

Many disputes may be resolved here.

Step 3 — Court Proceedings

If unresolved, the claimant must formally prove the case in court.
The court independently decides:

• Liability
  
• Quantum of damages
  
• Legal costs
  

Only a court judgment or agreed settlement creates a binding payment obligation.

4. What You Should Do If You Receive a Compensation Demand

Stay Calm — Do Not Admit Liability Immediately

Early admissions can affect your legal position.

Preserve Evidence

Keep:

• Photos and video recordings
  
• Messages
  
• Medical or repair records
  
• Witness details
  

Evidence often determines the outcome.

Avoid Informal Settlements Without Advice

Quick settlements may:

• Overpay an unsupported claim
  
• Prevent insurance coverage
  
• Create further legal exposure
  

Notify Your Insurance Agent

It is important to forward all the relevant letters and court documents to your insurance agent immediately.

Seek Legal Advice Early

A lawyer can:

• Assess liability and evidence
  
• Respond formally to the demand
  
• Negotiate or defend the claim
  
• Protect your procedural rights
  

Early advice is often far less costly than reacting late.

5. The Key Takeaway

In Hong Kong:

Anyone can make a compensation claim.
But only a proven claim creates a legal duty to pay.

Knowing this distinction empowers you to respond calmly, legally, and strategically—rather than emotionally or under pressure.

How TITUS Can Help

At TITUS, our litigation and dispute resolution team regularly assists clients who face:

• Excessive or unsupported compensation demands
  
• Personal injury and accident claims
  
• Civil liability disputes
  
• Settlement negotiations and court defence
  

If you have received a compensation demand and are unsure how to respond,
seeking timely legal guidance can make a critical difference.

Disclaimer:
This article is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Specific legal advice should be sought based on your individual circumstances.

Related reading

• Navigating Termination: MPF Offsetting, Notice Periods and Unfair Dismissal in Hong Kong
• Understanding MPF Offsetting in Hong Kong
• Contact Titus

The post Unreasonable Compensation Claims in Hong Kong: Do You Really Have to Pay? appeared first on Titus.

It’s the classic sales nightmare: Your top account manager resigns. You wish them well, throw a farewell lunch, and they walk out the door.

Three weeks later, you realize your sales pipeline has gone quiet. You check in with a long-term client, only to hear: “Oh, we actually moved our account to [Ex-Employee]’s new agency. They gave us a great call last week.”

You’ve been poached.

Many Hong Kong business owners assume their “Non-Compete” clause covers this. But as we discussed in our previous post, non-competes are hard to enforce. The real weapon for protecting your revenue is the Non-Solicitation Clause.

At TITUS, we know that for professional service firms, your client list is the business. Here is how to lock it down legally.

The “Double Lock”: Data vs. Relationships

To stop an employee from walking away with your business, you need to understand that you are protecting two different things: the Data (the contact list) and the Relationship (the influence).

You need a separate legal “lock” for each.

Lock 1: Confidentiality (The Data)

• The Risk: The employee downloads your CRM database to a USB drive or emails the client spreadsheet to their personal email before leaving.
• The Law: This is often a breach of confidentiality or even theft. However, Hong Kong courts are strict: You must prove the information is actually confidential.
• The Trap: If your client list is public (e.g., listed on your website as “Our Partners”), it is not confidential. If the employee just remembers the names in their head, that is also hard to stop.
• The Fix: Your employment contract must specifically define what constitutes Confidential Information.

Lock 2: Non-Solicitation (The Relationship)

• The Risk: The employee doesn’t steal the database, but they know the clients personally. They call them up and say, “I’m at a new firm now, I can offer you a better rate.”
• The Law: A Non-Solicitation clause forbids the ex-employee from actively approaching your clients to generate business.
• The Enforceability: Unlike non-competes (which ban working), courts are more willing to enforce non-solicits because they don’t stop the employee from earning a living—they just stop them from stealing your living.

The “Passive Poaching” Loophole (And How to Close It)

Here is the most common excuse ex-employees use in court:

“I didn’t breach the contract! I didn’t call the client. The client saw my LinkedIn update and called ME. I just answered the phone.”

In Hong Kong law, Solicitation usually requires the employee to make the first move. If the client calls them, a standard non-solicitation clause might not stop them from taking the business.

The Solution: The “Non-Dealing” Clause To plug this hole, you need a Non-Dealing Clause. This goes one step further: it says the ex-employee cannot process any business from your clients, regardless of who called whom. Even if the client begs them, they must say, “I cannot work with you for 6 months due to my contract.”

The “Personal Touch” Rule

Just like non-competes, you cannot be greedy. You cannot ban an ex-employee from contacting every single client your company has ever had.

To be enforceable in Hong Kong, the clause must be a reasonable and adequate protection to the employer. It should usually be limited to clients the employee personally dealt with during their employment.

• Valid: Banning a Sales Manager from poaching the 50 clients they managed.
• Invalid: Banning a Junior Admin from contacting a client they never met.

TITUS Checklist: Is Your Client Protection Real?

Open your current employment contract template. Does it pass this 3-point check?

1. Does it separate “Solicitation” from “Dealing”? (If it only says “Non-Solicit,” you are vulnerable to the “they called me” excuse.)
2. Is the timeframe reasonable? (6 to 12 months is standard. Anything over 12 months is high risk for rejection by courts.)
3. Is “Confidential Information” defined clearly? (Does it explicitly mention client databases, pricing lists, and contact details?)

Protect your assets. Your intellectual property isn’t just your logo; it’s the handshake you have with your clients. Don’t let it walk out the door.

Disclaimer: This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Drafting enforceable restrictive covenants requires precise legal wording tailored to your specific business risks. Always consult a solicitor.

The post They Can Leave, But They Can’t Take the Rolodex: Protecting Your Client List in Hong Kong appeared first on Titus.

Related reading

• Protecting Your Client List in Hong Kong
• Termination, Notice Periods and Unfair Dismissal in Hong Kong
• Contact Titus

The post Can My Ex-Employee Join a Competitor? Debunking Non-Compete Myths in Hong Kong appeared first on Titus.