SFKS is glad to be the Diamond Sponsor for Cross Strait Four Regions Young Lawyers Forum organised by the Law Society of Hong Kong, for the third year in a row.
This year, the Forum attracted more than 450 registrations from across jurisdictions, providing a platform for substantive dialogue on the profession’s future, regional collaboration and emerging frontiers of legal practice.
The Forum is focused on the role of legal profession in driving changes, and how new tools are applied with integrity, insight and responsibility. Under the theme of “DARE · Beyond”, it brought together young lawyers from Hong Kong, the Mainland, Macau and Taiwan, as well as speakers and participants from Belt and Road jurisdictions including Malaysia and Central Asia, to exchange insights on national strategic emerging industries and related legal developments, including artificial intelligence, space law, the Northern Metropolis and alternative dispute resolution, embracing the opportunities under the national 15th Five-Year Plan.
As a law firm rooted in Hong Kong and actively engaged with the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area and Belt and Road markets, SFKS values this meaningful platform for nurturing young legal talent and fostering cross-border collaboration.
We congratulate the success of the Forum, and look forward to driving changes together with other members of the legal profession in Hong Kong and the region.
SFKS is honored to receive Excellence in Professional Legal Award, in the Eddid Financial Leading Business Awards 2026.
Our Senior Partner Simon Siu represented SFKS in receiving the award, alongside our Partner Mathew Liu, attending the award presentation in the Financial Leaders Networking Luncheon.
The award ceremony brings together traditional financial pioneers and Web3.0 leaders to create a high-level platform for industry networking and resource synergy.
SFKS provides a wide range of reliable and tailor-made legal services to financial institutions and Fintech included innovative platforms, including incisive commercial advice, merger and acquisitions, due diligence, document drafting and review, compliance and regulatory support.
Our gratitude goes to Eddid and clients in support of the firm’s professional legal services.
On 15 October 2026, our Partner Mathew Liu conducted an online specialized legal seminar for members of The Hong Kong Occupational Therapy Association (HKOTA), titled ‘Reducing Documentation Risk: Legally Appropriate Clinical Records’.
Attended by over 250 members of the sector, the seminar equipped occupational therapists with practical strategies for maintaining legally sound clinical documentation, particularly as primary care healthcare models place greater demands on front-line record-keeping. The session focused on bridging the gap between clinical duties and risk management to safeguard both patient interests and practitioner reputation.
Significance of Clinical Records
Maintaining comprehensive clinical records in high-pressure practice environments is rarely straightforward. Practitioners must continually navigate complex parameters around adequacy, contemporaneousness, informed consent, and data privacy.
In our extensive regulatory and dispute resolution experience, clear and contemporaneous records are often the decisive factor in:
Cross-Discipline Legal Training & Capability
While healthcare presents distinct challenges, professionals across all disciplines face heightened regulatory oversight, public scrutiny, and potential complaints. Statutory codes of conduct offer baseline principles, but practitioners frequently struggle to translate these guidelines into daily practice under real-world constraints.
SFKS regularly designs and delivers tailored legal training for professional bodies, corporate entities, and regulatory institutions. The core legal principles governing professional practice, such as fiduciary obligations, duty of care, confidentiality, conflict management, and patient/client relations, apply across all sectors. In 2025 and 2026, Mathew Liu provided substantive legal training for occupational therapists, accountants, labour officers, journalists and teachers.
SFKS advises in regulatory body investigations and disciplinary proceedings, where legal interests, factual conflicts and reputational risks are all at stake. SFKS also advises complainants and claimants of professional negligence and misconduct disputes.
On 5 October 2026, the Hong Kong Economic Journal published two articles capturing an interview with our Managing Partner Roy Leung, on the latest developments on private wealth, estate and trust arrangements. The interview was also featured by Daniel Chow, Senior Managing Director of FTI Consulting. Please see extracts of the articles, and contact us for private wealth related enquiries.
Our Managing Partner Roy Leung and Partner Mathew Liu gave a CPD talk on “ListCo Dispute: Parties, Perspectives, and Playbook”, at Denis Chang’s Chambers with Counsel Anson Wong Yu Yat as co-speaker.
Navigating listed company (ListCo) disputes demands balancing corporate control with strict regulatory compliance. The real-world power struggles between shareholders, boards, lenders, and liquidators may require key tactical maneuvers like EGM requisitions, injunctions, provisional liquidations, etc. while high-stakes regulatory hurdles, including trade suspensions and Stock Exchange requisitions, shall be handled with additional care.
As proposed in the Talk, listed companies may consider developing an in-house playbook, reflecting the elements of 4"C"s: Control, Compliance, Cost-Efficiency & Cross-Border, in preparation of the pre-action, active-combat and post-resolution stages when disputes arise.
SFKS is experienced in advising listed companies, their shareholders, directors and independent committees, as well as insolvency practitioners, in the context of listed company disputes. Our Dispute Resolution Department and our Corporate & Commercial Department collaborate in providing instructive, strategic and timely legal support to stakeholders in the midst of heated conflict within and beyond listed companies.
SFKS has been awarded GBA Law Firm of the Year (Hong Kong) again in the ALB Hong Kong Law Awards 2026 by Asian Legal Business and Thomson Reuters.
As a cross-border law firm extending our welcoming arms to clients and practitioners across the GBA, SFKS is exceptionally proud and gracious for being awarded twice in a row since 2025.
Meanwhile, SFKS has been top finalists in all nominated categories in this year’s awards:
- GBA Law Firm of the Year (Hong Kong) - One of the Top 6 Finalists, and Winner
- Real Estate Law Firm of the Year - One of the Top 5 Finalists
- Private Wealth Law Firm of the Year - One of the Top 8 Finalists
- Labour and Employment Law Firm of the Year - One of the Top 5 Finalists
- Transportation and Logistics Law Firm of the Year - One of the Top 6 Finalists
- Corporate Citizenship Law Firm of the Year - One of the Top 5 Finalists
- Dispute Resolution Lawyer of the Year (Roy Leung, Managing Partner) - One of the Top 8 Finalists
These recognitions would not be possible without the professional contributions of members of our team. It remains for SFKS to thank our colleagues, as well as Asian Legal Business, panel judges and practitioners. Congratulations to the 25th anniversary of ALB Hong Kong Law Awards.
Sit, Fung, Kwong & Shum Solicitors (SFKS) extends its welcome and support to the passage of the amendments to the Lawyers Law of the People’s Republic of China passed by the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress (NPCSC) on 28 August 2026. The amendments provide clear provisions for the Greater Bay Area (GBA) lawyer system through national-level legal provisions, establishing a legal basis for the regularization of the practice system.
GBA Lawyer System Moves Towards Regularization
The GBA practice examination has been successfully held for five sessions, and over 650 Hong Kong and Macau legal practitioners have passed the examination and obtained the GBA Lawyer’s License, enabling them to handle certain civil and commercial legal matters that apply Mainland law in the nine Mainland cities of the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area. The existing pilot program is set to expire on 4 October 2026. The Department of Justice of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government has been working with the Ministry of Justice, the Department of Justice of Guangdong Province, and other authorities to advance the pilot program and strive for the regularization of the GBA lawyer system.
The Deputy Secretary for Justice, Mr. Horace Cheung, expressed his gratitude to the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress for its decision, noting that the amendment provides clear provisions for the GBA lawyer system through national-level legal provisions, thereby establishing a legal basis for the regularization of the practice system.
Actively Participating in GBA Legal Development
SFKS welcomes and supports the passage of the amendment to the Law of the People’s Republic of China on Lawyers by the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress, which regularizes the GBA lawyer practice system.
In fact, SFKS has been actively engaged in the development of legal services in the GBA.
GBA Lawyer Team: The firm has a total of 7 solicitors who have passed the GBA practice examination and obtained dual practice qualifications during their time in SFKS. Among them, Founding Partner Mr. Peter Sit became the first GBA lawyer registered in Jiangmen City. SFKS’s current Managing Partner, Mr. Roy Leung, together with Senior Partners Mr. Simon Siu and Mr. Joseph Wong, and Partner Ms. Jenny Wong are all GBA lawyers.
Industry Recognition: Since the Asian Legal Business (ALB) established the “GBA Law Firm of the Year (Hong Kong)” award, SFKS has been a finalist for three consecutive years, and secured the Winnerfor this award in 2025.
Deepening GBA Exchanges: In recent years, the firm has actively visited various GBA cities for professional exchanges, participated in the first Shenzhen Legal Services Expo, visited several lawyer associations in the GBA for legal exchanges, etc., establishing close cooperative relationships with the legal community in the GBA.
Rooted in Hong Kong · Serving the GBA
Since its establishment in 1981, SFKS has consistently upheld its commitment to “Serving Clients Respectfully, Applying Law Professionally, Rendering Work Effectively.” Leveraging its deep roots in Hong Kong’s common law system and its forward-looking presence in the GBA, the firm will continue to harness the unique advantages of “one country, two systems, three legal jurisdictions” to assist clients in seizing development opportunities in the GBA, facilitate the alignment of rules and mechanisms across the region, and actively integrate into and serve the nation’s overall development strategy.
The regularization of the GBA lawyer system represents a significant milestone in the nation’s rule of law development, offering Hong Kong’s legal profession a long-term and stable path for growth. The firm will continue to leverage its extensive experience in cross-border legal services to contribute to the advancement of the rule of law in the GBA.
Our firm acted for the Putative Respondent in a Judicial Review case in the High Court, and successfully opposed the Applicant’s application for leave to apply for judicial review and his substantive application concerning decisions on the termination of studies with the university (HCAL 1085/2026).
Please refer to the Judgment of Deputy High Court Judge Gary C.C. Lam.
The case was led by our Managing Partner Roy Leung and assisted by our trainee solicitor Jaimie Ho (soon to be admitted as qualified solicitor). Our firm regularly advises on public law and represents parties in administrative proceedings and judicial reviews.
SFKS secured clients’ victory in the Court of Appeal which, for the first time in Hong Kong, considered a claim of fraudulent calumny in the context of a contested will: Re The Estate of Ip Chan Kee CACV 116/2025, [2026] HKCA 1443.
The Court of Appeal unprecedentedly applied the judgment in Edwards v Edwards [2007] WTLR 1387 at §47 on the approach for avoiding a testamentary disposition on the grounds of fraud (fraudulent calumny).
The party who asserted fraudulent calumny must prove that: (1) there has been a false representation; (2) it was made to the testator; (3) it was about the character of an existing or potential beneficiary; (4) it was made for the purpose of inducing the testator to alter his testamentary dispositions; (5) the representor made it knowing it to be untrue or being reckless as to its truth; and (6) the disputed will was made only because of the fraudulent calumny.
Applying the 6 elements to be proved by the defendants asserting fraudulently calumny, the Court of Appeal held as follows:
(1) The Court of Appeal upheld the finding that the defendants failed to discharge the burden of proving that the representations by the younger son to the deceased father (“Representations”) were false.
(2) There was no dispute that the Representations were made to the father.
(3) The Court of Appeal, unlike the trial judge, found that the Representations speaks of the character of the elder son.
(4) The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge’s finding that the defendants failed to prove that the Representations were made with the specific purpose of inducing the father to alter his testamentary dispositions.
(5) Following (1), the Court of Appeal rejected the contention that the younger son knew that the Representations were false;
(6) The Court of Appeal refused to interfere with the trial judge’s conclusion that the subject will of the father was not proved to be induced by fraudulent calumny.
This Judgment sets a landmark precedent on how factual findings shall be analyzed with corresponding evidence, or interfered by the appellate court with respect to each of the 6 key elements in the context of fraudulent calumny.
This case is led by our Managing Partner Mr. Roy Leung, assisted by Senior Associate Ms. Koey Wong and Associate Mr. Manson Chan. SFKS takes this opportunity to thank Counsel Mr. Jonathan Chang SC and Ms. Esther Mak for their thorough and able assistance in this appeal.
Our Partner Mathew Liu provided a full-day training course to senior property managers and officers on mediation in the contexts of water seepage and disputes in multi-storey buildings.
The training course was co-organized by the Department of Justice and the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department (FEHD), via the Joint Mediation Helpline Office, in promotion of the firm belief on the vital role of alternative dispute resolutions among neighbors.
This course was also one of the first property management training course after the implementation of new procedures for investigating water seepage in private buildings by the Joint Office by FEHD and the Buildings Department on 16 July 2026. The new procedures involves expedited investigation, wider use of technology and prosecution power. Property management companies, alongside owners and stakeholders, are keen on receiving regulatory, legal and expert support in this regard.
SFKS is experienced in advising on all ranges of property and land disputes, for instance, water seepage and leakage, building management, tenancy and conveyancing disputes.
SFKS is honoured to be named as Finalist in 7 categories of ALB Hong Kong Law Awards 2026 by Thomson Reuters.
- GBA Law Firm of the Year (Hong Kong)
- Real Estate Law Firm of the Year
- Private Wealth Law Firm of the Year
- Labour and Employment Law Firm of the Year
- Transportation and Logistics Law Firm of the Year
- Corporate Citizenship Law Firm of the Year
- Dispute Resolution Lawyer of the Year (Roy Leung,Managing Partner)
SFKS is deeply grateful for these nominations, and shall continue with our solemn pledge to serve clients respectfully, apply law professionally and render work effectively. We also congratulate all finalists and peers in the legal profession.
SFKS is pleased to announce a successful outcome for our client before the District Court in Tang Chau Ming v Tang Sze Yuen [2026] HKDC 1107. On 22 June 2026, Deputy District Judge Alfred Cheng dismissed the Plaintiff’s claims for defamation and malicious falsehood against our client, the Defendant.
The dispute arose from the management of a Chinese customary law family arrangement known as Yuen Pak Tso (元柏祖) (the “Tso”) and its land in Yuen Long. The Plaintiff, who served as the elected manager of the Tso, alleged that a “Meeting Summary” distributed by our client during an ancestral worship gathering contained defamatory words. In the Plaintiff’s case, the words in question suggested that the Plaintiff had breached his fiduciary duties and acted dishonestly by secretly renting out Tso land to his own sole proprietorship business, Heng Hing Development Co. The Plaintiff sought substantial damages and an injunction.
After a 4-day trial, the Court evaluated the natural and ordinary meaning of the words and determined that they were defamatory in nature. While the Court rejected the defence of justification—finding the statements to be factually incorrect based on the evidence presented by the Plaintiff’s witness—our client successfully established the defence of qualified privilege so the Plaintiff’s defamation claim was dismissed. The Court agreed that the communication occurred on a privileged occasion, ruling that our client, as a descendant and member of the Tso, possessed a legitimate social and moral interest to convey his management concerns to fellow clansmen, who had a corresponding interest to receive them.
Crucially, the Court rejected the Plaintiff's contention that the qualified privilege was defeated by express malice on our client’s part. Applying the established appellate principles, the Court emphasized that a defendant’s carelessness, irrationality, or tendency to leap to conclusions does not equate to malice. The Judge accepted that our client maintained an honest, genuine belief in the truth of his statements due to a breakdown in communication and a poor relationship with the Plaintiff, rather than an improper dominant motive or a reckless indifference to the truth. As a result, the Plaintiff’s claims were entirely dismissed, and he was ordered to pay a portion of our client’s legal costs.
This outcome represents a complete vindication for our client following a deeply personal family and customary land dispute. It also reinforces SFKS’s established expertise in handling highly contentious defamation, customary law matters, and complex disputes involving qualified privilege and factual challenges.
This case serves as a vital reminder of the robust protective boundaries afforded by the defence of qualified privilege in Hong Kong defamation law. It underscores that the law actively safeguards the freedom of honest communication where a shared moral, social, or legal duty exists—such as within family, community, or customary organizations. So long as a speaker acts in good faith to protect a legitimate interest that is shared by the audience and harbors an honest belief in what he says, the protection of privilege remains intact, even if the underlying conclusions are ultimately shown to be mistaken.
This case was led by our Consultant Mr. Tommy Tam and assisted by our Senior Associate Ms. Koey Wong and Trainee Solicitor Ms. Janice Leung. SFKS takes this opportunity to thank Counsel Mr. Stony Chan for his thorough and able assistance throughout these proceedings.
The full judgment can be found at:
