Irene Cheng and I have co-authored "Hong Kong Bank Disclosure Costs: Judicial and Legislative Developments," tracking recent shifts in court-ordered bank disclosure Costs.

Published in the Exclusive Online Newsletter of Hong Kong Lawyer Journal.

https://lnkd.in/dSJVPMHe

The piece breaks down how recent decisions like Ho Yuen Yu Ivy v Zhang Li Hua and Hwang Joon Sang clarify the financial landscape for fraud litigation. While innocent third-party banks are entitled to recover compliance Costs, the High Court has made it clear that these orders are purely compensatory.

They are not a profit-generating tool for routine compliance work, even when made on a full indemnity basis. The article addresses the practical impact of this shift for fraud victims tracing assets, legal practitioners framing disclosure requests, and banks managing compliance staffing.

This marks my fourth feature article for the Hong Kong Lawyer Journal.

A huge thank you to the editorial team for their incredible guidance and support in bringing this piece to life!

In case you have missed my previous articles on Hong Kong Lawyer Journal and LinkedIn Newsletter:

The HKIAC Rules 2024: Flexibility, Innovation and Modern Balance in Arbitration (7 August 2026)

https://lnkd.in/gZJMzrg2

Defamation, Digital Speech, Apologies, and Privacy in Hong Kong in 2026 (June 2026)

https://lnkd.in/g3-pVv_A

Hong Kong’s Comprehensive Framework for Regulated Virtual Asset Trading and Financial Crime Prevention: A 2026 Legal Analysis (February 2026)

https://lnkd.in/g5Ewy95d

LinkedIn Newsletter: https://lnkd.in/gUQTCjSG

Newsletter Articles: Civil Litigation

Service of Notices of Appeal in Hong Kong

https://lnkd.in/dm2t9x_V

Calderbank Offers in Hong Kong

https://lnkd.in/dufmm3zH

Hong Kong Civil Litigation’s Double-Edged Tool: Sanctioned Offers

https://lnkd.in/dQHxAZFK

Second-Layer Fraud Litigation Toolkit

https://lnkd.in/gQSKyEay

From Freeze to Framework: The Letter of No Consent Regime

https://lnkd.in/gSTEKCAa

The Architecture of Crypto Asset Recovery

https://lnkd.in/dbyxHx5s

Crypto Asset Recovery: A Comparative Look at Hong Kong and Mainland China

https://lnkd.in/dkyjap7c

I only write when there is a meaningful topic to unpack. If you want these insights delivered directly to your notifications whenever the next article drops, feel free to hit subscribe.

Subscribe: 🔗 https://lnkd.in/gUQTCjSG

Direct Access: https://www.hk-lawyer.org/content/hong-kong-bank-disclosure-costs-judicial-and-legislative-developments

#HongKongLaw #FraudLitigation #CivilLitigation #BankingLaw
#AssetRecovery

Theft sentencing in Hong Kong is highly fact-sensitive and category-dependent, governed by a nuanced body of jurisprudence developed under the Theft Ordinance (Cap. 210).

My latest article published by the Hong Kong Lawyer "Theft Sentencing in Hong Kong: Categories, Aggravating Factors and Appellate Guidance", examines three core propositions shaping criminal jurisprudence in our courts:

1️⃣ No Universal Tariff: While Section 9 dictates a 10-year statutory maximum, theft cannot be treated with a one-size-fits-all approach. The proper sentence remains strictly bound by individual facts and overarching proportionality.

2️⃣ Category-Specific Frameworks: An analysis of how appellate courts segment offending. Low-value shop theft by first offenders generally warrants a fine (Pang Chak Wai), persistent recidivism shifts baseline custody targets upwards (Yang Yan Yun), and pickpocketing triggers strict deterrent guidance (Ngo Van Huy).

3️⃣ Calibrating Aggravation: Analyzing the technical thresholds for planning, offending while on bail, and the strict boundaries of what legally constitutes a true "breach of trust" (Sim Ka-wing).

The piece also unpacks the staged, utilitarian timeline established in Ngo Van Nam regarding how the traditional one-third guilty plea discount diminishes based on the precise procedural juncture of the admission.

🔗 Read the full analysis online: https://lnkd.in/dKfc2fnK

In case you missed my other Hong Kong Lawyer feature articles, they can be accessed directly through the following links:

Criminal Law, Jurisprudence & Procedure

“Forgotten, Confused, or Dishonest? Mental-State Evidence and the Proof of Theft in Hong Kong”

🔗 https://lnkd.in/gSgcquY3

Commercial Litigation, Asset Tracing & Dispute Resolution

“Hong Kong Bank Disclosure Costs: Judicial and Legislative Developments”

🔗 https://lnkd.in/dSJVPMHe

“THE HKIAC RULES 2024: FLEXIBILITY, INNOVATION, AND THE MODERN BALANCE IN ARBITRATION”

🔗 https://lnkd.in/gZJMzrg2

Media Law, Digital Speech & Cyber Privacy

“Defamation, Digital Speech, Apologies, and Privacy in Hong Kong in 2026”

🔗 https://lnkd.in/g3-pVv_A

Fintech Regulatory Compliance & Financial Crime

“Hong Kong’s Comprehensive Framework for Regulated Virtual Asset Trading and Financial Crime Prevention: A 2026 Legal Analysis”

🔗 https://lnkd.in/g5Ewy95d

Many thanks to the editors of Hong Kong Lawyer.

#HongKongLaw #CriminalDefense #SentencingPrinciples #TheftOrdinance #LegalInsights #HongKongLawyer Irene Cheng, Shan Hashmi

https://www.hk-lawyer.org/content/theft-sentencing-hong-kong-categories-aggravating-factors-and-appellate-guidance

The article examines a substantial but underexamined body of Hong Kong authority on psychiatric and medical evidence. It argues that Hong Kong Courts have not developed a distinct psychiatric defence to theft. Instead, they have developed an evidential framework for analysing claims of confusion, forgetfulness, cognitive impairment, depression, anxiety, psychosis and medication-induced dysfunction.

The authorities demonstrate that psychiatric evidence may negate mens rea, but only where it is properly supported, factually grounded and sufficiently connected to the accused’s mental state at the material time. Equally, the cases illustrate circumstances in which psychiatric evidence may properly be rejected without undermining a conviction. Taken together, the jurisprudence reveals a consistent concern with proof rather than excuse and with evidential reliability rather than diagnostic labels.

Drawing together authorities spanning almost three decades, the article argues that the cases collectively reveal a coherent structure organised around three recurring inquiries: whether the accused was genuinely forgotten, whether the accused was genuinely confused, or whether the evidence nevertheless establishes dishonesty.

Ultimately, the resulting jurisprudence does not ask whether an accused is mentally ill. It asks a more precise legal question: whether the evidence establishes beyond reasonable doubt that the accused acted dishonestly and with the intention permanently to deprive. The Courts’ concern is neither diagnosis nor excuse, but proof.

The article is now available online:

🔗 https://lnkd.in/gSgcquY3

Thanks to Hong Kong Lawyer / Thomson Reuters for publishing this piece.

Thanks to Ms Irene Cheng , Solicitor, and Mr Shan Hashmi, Swansea University / Prifysgol Abertawe, LLB Law with Criminology for their assistance.

#HKLawyer #CriminalLaw #HongKongLaw #MensRea #Evidence #Theft #MentalHealthLaw #LegalWriting #Litigation #HongKongLegalProfessionion

https://www.hk-lawyer.org/content/forgotten-confused-or-dishonest-mental-state-evidence-and-proof-theft-hong-kong

Procedure wins the battle, but enforcement wins the war, because an arbitral award is only as valuable as its enforceability.

I am pleased to share my latest feature article published in Hong Kong Lawyer:

📖 The HKIAC Rules 2024: Flexibility, Innovation, and the Modern Balance in Arbitration

The article examines how the HKIAC Rules 2024 build upon the successful 2018 framework while introducing refinements aimed at efficiency, flexibility, integrity, information security, sustainability, and effective dispute resolution.

It covers:

▪️ Tribunal case management and procedural powers


▪️ Early determination and expedited procedures


▪️ Joinder, consolidation, and multi-contract disputes


▪️ Emergency arbitrator relief and interim measures


▪️ Third-party funding and ORFS agreements


▪️ Diversity, information security, and ESG considerations


▪️ Confidentiality and publication of awards


▪️ Intellectual property arbitration


▪️ Enforcement of awards, tribunal orders, and emergency relief under the Hong Kong Arbitration Ordinance (Cap. 609)

A central theme of the article is that parties do not pursue arbitration to obtain an award. They pursue arbitration to obtain a result that can ultimately be enforced.

This publication marks my third feature article in Hong Kong Lawyer, following:

📌 February 2026
Hong Kong’s Comprehensive Framework for Regulated Virtual Asset Trading and Financial Crime Prevention: A 2026 Legal Analysis
https://lnkd.in/g5Ewy95d

📌 June 2026
Defamation, Digital Speech, Apologies, and Privacy in Hong Kong in 2026
https://lnkd.in/g3-pVv_A

📌 August 2026
The HKIAC Rules 2024: Flexibility, Innovation, and the Modern Balance in Arbitration

I am grateful to the editors of Hong Kong Lawyer / Thomson Reuters for providing a platform to contribute to discussions on arbitration, financial regulation, technology, and contemporary legal developments in Hong Kong.

#HKIAC #Arbitration #cairb #InternationalArbitration #HongKongLaw #DisputeResolution #ADR, Chaudhry Solicitors #HongKongLawyer

https://lnkd.in/gZJMzrg2

https://www.hk-lawyer.org/content/hkiac-rules-2024-flexibility-innovation-and-modern-balance-arbitration

“Hong Kong’s Comprehensive Framework for Regulated Virtual Asset Trading and Financial Crime Prevention: A 2026 Legal Analysis”,

a second lead feature article has been published in the latest issue:

“Defamation, Digital Speech, Apologies, and Privacy in Hong Kong in 2026”

Published on behalf of the Law Society of Hong Kong by Sweet & Maxwell, Thomson Reuters.

Thank you to the reviewers, editors, and the wider team for their work in bringing the article to publication.

Full article:

https://lnkd.in/gh_vs8UB

Legal Analysis" is the Lead Feature in the February 2026 issue of Hong Kong Lawyer, the official journal of the Law Society of Hong Kong (published by Thomson Reuters). The article examines the regulatory landscape at the intersection of virtual assets and financial crime prevention.

Thank you to solicitor, Irene Cheng for her invaluable contribution.

The article is available in the February 2026 issue at hk-lawyer.org.

Book A Consultation: https://calendly.com/ahmed_ashfaq

Full Article: https://www.hk-lawyer.org/content/hong-kong’s-comprehensive-framework-regulated-virtual-asset-trading-and-financial-crime

Author’s Biography: https://www.hk-lawyer.org/authors/ahmed-ashfaq