The Law Society of Hong Kong is a professional association for solicitors in Hong Kong vested with statutory powers to regulate the professional conduct of solicitors, trainee solicitors and foreign lawyers. It was incorporated in 1907 as a company limited by guarantee.
The Law Society speaks for the solicitors’ profession in Hong Kong and ensures our voice are accurately and purposefully communicated to relevant parties
The Law Society is dedicated to providing relevant and effective support to our members including professional training and legal practice updates.
The Law Society is committed to facilitating the attainment and maintenance of the highest professional standards by our members in the interest of the community
The Law Society reaches out and maintains a wide local and global network for knowledge exchange, experience sharing and collaboration between our members and different sectors of both the local and international communities.
The Law Society strives to raise general public legal awareness, facilitate public access to legal services and promote a culture of giving back to the community among our members.
Principle 2.03, the Governing Principle in Chapter 7 and Principle 7.04 of The Hong Kong Solicitors’ Guide to Professional Conduct, Volume 1 (2nd Edition) (“Guide”)
Disgraceful, dishonourable, or discreditable conduct within the meaning of Section 2(2) of the Legal Practitioners Ordinance, Cap.159 (“LPO”)
Date of Hearing: 31 October 2024
Date of Findings and Order: 19 November 2025
Date of Order: 11 May 2026
On 31 October 2024, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (“Tribunal”) found the following complaints against the Respondents proved:
Complaint 1
The 1st Respondent, being the supervising partner of the Firm and the handling solicitor of the relevant matters at the material time, had failed to properly supervise unqualified staff of the Firm, in breach of Principle 2.03 of the Guide.
Complaint 2
The 2nd Respondent committed disgraceful, dishonourable, or discreditable conduct within the meaning of Section 2(2) of the LPO, in that being an employee of the Firm, he had failed to (a) tell a former client of the Firm (“Client”) who gave him a significant amount of HK$200,000 as gift (“Gift A”) that the Client was not obliged to give him anything in addition to the legal fees rendered to the Firm; (b) insist that the Client be independently advised as to Gift A; and (c) refuse Gift A in the circumstances that the Client had eventually not been independently advised as to Gift A, in breach of the Governing Principle in Chapter 7 and Principle 7.04 of the Guide.
Complaint 3
The 3rd Respondent committed disgraceful, dishonourable, or discreditable conduct within the meaning of Section 2(2) of the LPO, in that being an employee of the Firm, he had failed to (a) tell the Client who gave him a significant amount of HK$200,000 as gift (“Gift B”) that the Client was not obliged to give him anything in addition to the legal fees rendered to the Firm; (b) insist that the Client be independently advised as to Gift B; and (c) refuse Gift B in the circumstances that the Client had eventually not been independently advised as to Gift B, in breach of the Governing Principle in Chapter 7 and Principle 7.04 of the Guide.
On 19 November 2025, the Tribunal ordered that:
On 11 May 2026, the Tribunal ordered that the application of the 1st and the 3rd Respondents for leave to appeal against part of the Tribunal’s Costs Order and deferment of payment of that part of the Tribunal’s Costs Order be refused.
Mr. Ching King Tat of Messrs. Long An & Lam LLP, Prosecutor for the Law Society of Hong Kong, the Applicant
Mr. Benjamin Chain, instructed by Messrs. Au, Thong & Tsang, for the 1st and the 3rd Respondents
The 2nd Respondent acting in person was absent
Mr. Iu Ting Kwok, Clerk to the Tribunal
Tribunal Members:
Ms. Samantha Claire Gershon (Chairperson)
Mr. Chu Siu-lun, Ivan
Dr. Lam Chi-yan
