China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013 by Andrew Alcock

A dedicated jurisdictional REVIEW

Review 中國法律商務2013年回顧

2013

Annual

Contents | 目錄 Editor David Tring (david.tring@euromoneyasia.com) +852 2842 6964 Chinese editor Eve Yao (eve.yao@euromoneyasia.com) +852 2842 6916 Production manager Andy Alcock (andy.alcock@euromoneyasia.com) +852 2842 6928 Associate publisher Matthew Siu (matthew.siu@euromoneyasia.com) +852 2842 6937 Publisher Peter Ollier (peter.ollier@euromoneyasia.com) +852 2842 6944 Published by Asia Law & Practice Euromoney Institutional Investor (Jersey) Ltd 27/F, 248 Queen’s Road East Wanchai, Hong Kong

Banking & Finance | 銀行及融資

New Circular deregulates foreign exchange controls 新規定放寬外匯管制

Capital Markets | 資本市場

CSRC’s reforming chairman steps down 證監會改革派主席離任

Interview: David Fu, CSRC Strategy and Development Committee 專訪：前中國證監會規劃委研究員傅志耕

Competition | 競爭法

How the Qihoo v Tencent case affects China’s anti-monopoly regime 奇虎訴騰訊案對中國反壟斷機制的影響

Insights: Get ready for more enforcement by Susan Ning of King & Wood Mallesons 觀察: 預備迎接進一步的執法 — 金杜律師事務所寧宣鳳

© EUROMONEY INSTITUTIONAL INVESTOR (JERSEY) LTD 2013 Disclaimer The material in this periodical does not constitute advice and no liability is assumed in relation to it. The materials referred to in this publication are publicly available.

Dispute Resolution | 爭議解決

Interview: CIETAC Hong Kong’s Secretary General, Wang Wenying

Directors, Euromoney Institutional Investor (Jersey) Ltd: Peter Richard Ensor, Tony Shale, Anita Rye

專訪: 中國國際經濟貿易仲裁委員會香港仲裁中心秘書長王文英

Divisional director, Legal Media Group Danny Williams

觀察: 長期性的問題 — 胡光律師事務所牟笛

Head of marketing, Asia Natalie Dent

Intellectual Property & TMT | 知識產權和電信、傳媒及科技 42

How to resolve the CIETAC dispute: rebranding 如何調解貿仲委 (CIETAC) 糾紛：重建品牌

Insights: Thinking long term by Vincent Mu of Martin Hu & Partners

CEO, Euromoney Institutional Investor, Asia Tony Shale

How Chengdu is using IP to attract foreign investment

This publication is a supplement to China Law & Practice magazine ISSN 1012-6724

Interview: Shen Jianfeng, Director of ZTE’s IP Department

Consultant Donald J. Lewis Associate Professor of Law, University of Hong Kong

Insights: The importance of IP strategy by Chen Jihong of Zhong Lun Law Firm

Translation services provided by Jiangsu Sunyu Information Technology Co Ltd

成都如何用知識產權發展優勢吸引外商投資

專訪: 中興通訊知識產權部部長沈劍峰

觀察: 知識產權戰略的重要性 — 中倫律師事務所陳際紅

Labour & Employment | 勞動及人力資源

SPC strikes balance over employment contracts 最高人民法院盡力維護勞動合同中的利益平衡

中國法律商務2013年回顧

Contents

Contents | 目錄 Mergers & Acquisitions | 兼並收購

MOFCOM speeds up simple mergers 商務部鼓勵企業間簡單合併

Interview: Thomas Eastling, director of advisory services for American Appraisal in Hong Kong 專訪: 美國評值公司駐香港咨詢業務主管 Thomas Eastling Insights: Investors look west by Yang Yuhua of Alliance J&S Law Firm 觀察: 投資者朝向西部發展 — 頤合中鴻律師事務所楊玉華

Private Equity | 私募股權

CSRC allows capital markets competition 中國證券監督管理委員會鼓勵資本市場競爭

Interview: Peter Fuhrman, chairman of China First Capital 專訪: 中國首創投資有限公司 (China First Capital) 董事長 Peter Fuhrman Insights: Looking for the exit by Hu Yijin of Jun He 觀察: 尋找出路 — 君合律師事務所胡義錦

Real Estate & Construction | 房地產及建築

What the Soho China and Fosun case means for the real estate sector Soho 中國與復星集團一案對地產業的影響 Insights: Looking for new opportunities by Eric Chen of Dacheng Law Offices 觀察: 尋找新機遇 — 大成律師事務所陳巍

Annual Awards | 年度獎項

The full list of nominations for deals, teams and firms of the year for the China Law & Practice annual awards ceremony 今年《中國法律商務》年度獎項完整的入圍名單，包括了年度傑出交易，傑出團隊及律所

Firm profiles | 律所簡介

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

120

@CLP_editorial

Access the legal professionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s most trusted guide to China n Full translations of PRC laws with English and Chinese side-by-side

n Online database contains 25 years of translations, in-depth articles and opinion

n Expert analysis of legal developments and trends n Latest news affecting businesses in China n Sectors covered: Anti-monopoly, Banking & Finance, Capital Markets, Dispute Resolution, FDI, IP, Labour & Employment, M&A, Real Estate and Tax

CLP e-alerts: n Weekly e-mail including in-depth analysis, latest translations and legislation roundup

n Monthly roundup of all translations and analysis articles that have been uploaded

Visit chinalawandpractice.com today for more information and to start your free trial Enquiries: vishal.mahtani@euromoneyasia.com +852 2842 6929

Banking & Finance

News analysis

New Circular deregulates foreign exchange controls | 新規定放寬外匯管制 A new Circular from the State Administration of Foreign Exchange has reduced the approval burden on the capital account, a move that will boost investor confidence by showing a renewed commitment to liberalising foreign exchange controls | 國家外匯管理局發佈的一份新規定減輕了資本賬戶的審批負擔。此舉措顯示出國家外匯管理局進一步放寬外匯管理的承諾，這將讓投資者信心大增

he Circular removes many of the previous layers of approval foreign-invested enterprises (FIEs) were subject to when incorporated in China. For the first time, it also permits FIEs to lend to their headquarters an amount equalling the profits owed to them. The impact on foreign direct investment is substantial. The Circular reinforces SAFE’s commitment to further liberalising foreign exchange controls by taking a less active role in approvals. “It is a great step forward as SAFE is becoming smarter and more efficient. Foreign exchange controls remain, but with a more market-oriented approach,” said Michael Tan, senior counsel at Taylor Wessing in Shanghai.

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

Background

Accounts

One of the main factors behind the Circular is a desire to reinforce investor confidence. By relaxing the controls on the capital account and invigorating cross-border renminbi settlement, it makes the currency more accessible to foreigners. “It comes as part of the financial industry’s 12th five-year plan to open-up and liberalise foreign exchange controls in the direct investment area. The Circular was already in its draft form earlier this year and was circulated internally to solicit comments,” said Tan. The Circular was put on hold because of China’s once-in-a-decade power transition, but was quickly rolled out afterwards.

After incorporation FIEs have to establish a pre-expenditure account to handle any acquisitions of assets. Previously, SAFE heavily regulated this special account through time limits, ceiling amounts and minimum foreign exchange inflow, which all required the Administration’s approval. The Circular has abolished many of these obstacles, as SAFE’s approval is no longer necessary and incorporation expenditures and subsequent transfers will now involve bank procedures. Similarly, capital accounts were subject to strict regulations. The capital account, along with the current account, forms the corner-

新聞分析

is a great “stepItforward as SAFE is becoming smarter and more efficient. Foreign exchange controls remain, but with a more market-oriented approach | 這是向前邁進的重要一步，國家外匯管理局正在向更加精簡高效的方向轉變。外匯管理依然在，但會加強市場的導向作用

”

Michael Tan, Taylor Wessing, Shanghai 陳振福, 泰樂信律師事務所, 上海

stone of foreign exchange controls in China. FIEs use the capital account to make capital contributions. Control of the capital account is now streamlined, as banks can open an account for FIEs with restrictions over the location and the number of accounts removed. “The Circular assigns more responsibility to banks and SAFE will only administer foreign exchange related to registrations and keep a high level supervision on capital flows. Banks will play a much larger role in verifying capital account transactions, especially as they check documentation and establish accounts,” said Tan.

Banks’ Role Banks will now play a much greater role in administering foreign exchange for FIEs under the Circular. SAFE has provided detailed guidelines to help banks and local branches of the Administration to implement these changes. “This is a practical and pragmatic approach from SAFE. There will still be monitoring and control over FIEs and SAFE reserves the right to punish banks for not exercising due prudence in its verification,” said Tan.

If SAFE decides that a bank is not following regular practices this is likely to lead to all transactions being scanned by the Administration. By providing this detailed guidance, SAFE has shown its commitment to letting banks take the lead.

Financing One of the most exciting elements to come out of the Circular is the potential for financing. FIEs can now lend to their headquarters an amount equalling the profits owed to them, which has never been allowed before. “This creates a new way for money to flow out. It is a minor step, but for profits owed to foreign investors it means proceeds do not have to be repatriated as dividends, which immediately trigger tax issues,” said Tan.

國

家外匯管理局 (SAFE) 於 2012年11 月 19 日發佈了《國家外匯管理局關於進一步改進和調整直接投資外匯管理政策的通知》。此項通知已於 2012年 12 月 17 日起生效。此通知免除了先前外商投資企業在中國成立時需經歷的許多種審批。此通知也有史以來第一次准許外商投資企業向其總公司發放貸款，放款額度不超過其（向總公司的）未匯出利潤。這將對外商直接投資產生巨大影響。此通知兌現及強化了外管局進一步放寬外匯管理的承諾。 “這是重大的一步，國家外匯管理局正在向更加精簡高效的方向轉變。外匯管理依然在，但會加強市場的導向作用。”泰樂信律師事務所上海辦公室的高級合伙人陳振福說。背景此通知背後的主要動機之一就是要增強投資者信心。通過放寬對資本賬戶的管制和鼓勵跨境人民幣結算，外國人能夠更方便地使用人民幣。陳振福說：“放寬直接投資領域中的外匯管制是金融業‘十二五’規劃的一部分。今年早些時候，通知草案已經成形，並在內部成員中傳閱以收集意見。” 此通知由於中國十年一度的政權交接而暫停發佈。但在政權交接完成後，通知很快便得到公佈。

銀行及融資 INDIA

外商投資賬戶外商投資企業在成立後必須設立預開支賬戶，以處理所有資產收購。此前，國家外匯管理局對此類特殊賬戶實行嚴格的管理，規定了時間限制、最高金額和最低外匯流入量，而這些都需要管理局進行審批。該通知取消了許多此類障礙，現在，企業無需再請求國家外匯管理局申請審批，成立公司的費用和隨後的資產轉移會通過銀行程序辦理。同樣，資本賬戶先前也受到嚴格監管，因為資本賬戶和經常賬戶是中國外匯管理的重中之重。外商投資企業通過資本賬戶貢獻資金。而現在，資本賬戶管理更加高效，因為銀行可以為外商投資企業開設賬戶，且地點和賬戶數量方面的限制已不復存在。陳振福表示：“該通知給銀行分配了更多責任。外管局僅管理與企業註冊相關的外匯，並對資本流動實行整體監管。銀行將在覈實資本賬戶交易的過程中發揮更大的作用，尤其是在他們檢查文件和設立賬戶時。” 銀行的作用按照此通知，現在銀行將在外商投資企業的外匯管理中發揮更大的作用。外管局已提供詳細指南，幫助銀行和國家外匯管理局地方分局實施這些變更。 “國家外匯管理局的這一方法務實可行。外商投資仍得到監管，外管局有權處罰在覈實過程中未謹慎操作的銀行。”陳振福說。若外管局判定某家銀行沒有遵守規定做，則很有可能會對該銀行的所有交易進行審查。有了這份詳細指南，國家外匯管理局明確了其讓銀行起帶頭作用的態度。融資行為此通知帶來的最令人興奮的結果之一就是帶動融資。外商投資企業現可以向他們的總公司放款，放款額度不超過其未匯出利潤。這在以前是一直被禁止。陳振福表示：“這為資金外流創造了新的途徑。雖然這只是一小步，但對於外商而言，這意味著外商投資企業不必將收益通過股息的形式調回本國，這種做法會可能會立即引發稅收問題。”

中國法律商務2013年回顧

Banking & Finance

News analysis

CSRC extends RQFII to HK banks and insurers | 證監會批准香港的銀行及保險公司成為RQFII China’s top regulator is allowing Hong Kong and foreign financial institutions to tap into the country’s capital markets, but it is unclear what threshold the foreign institutions will have to meet to be classified as having a principal place of business in Hong Kong | 中國證券業最高監督機構現允許香港和外國的金融機構開發中國的資本市場。但目前還不清楚外國機構需要達到甚麼樣的標準才能被歸類為“主要營業地點在香港”

he China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) released details of the Renminbi Qualified Foreign Institutional Investor (RQFII) scheme in December 2011. At the time, the scheme allowed Hong Kong subsidiaries of fund management and securities companies in the mainland to apply for quotas to use renminbi raised in Hong Kong to invest in the securities market. This has all changed as the investment scope has been enlarged under the under the Measures for Pilot Projects for Securities Investment in China by Renminbi Qualified Foreign Institutional Investors (人民幣合格境外機構投資者境內證券投資試點辦法) and the Provisions for the Implementation of the «Measures for Pilot Projects for Securities Investment in China by Renminbi Qualified Foreign Institutional Investors» (關於實施《人民幣合格境外機構投資者境內證券投資試點辦法》的規定) released on March 1 and effective the same day. “The latest RQFII measures are a continuation of the QFII rules that the CSRC has relaxed over the past year,” said Hubert Tse, a partner at Boss & Young in Shanghai. “The CSRC is looking to continue to open-up domestic capital markets to foreign long-term institutional investors, as it wants to bring more long-term capital into the market,” he added. The rules allow for Hong Kong subsidiaries of mainland commercial banks and insurance firms to enter the domestic market, as well as

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

locally-based financial institutions. The CSRC is trying to realise the ultimate goal of internationalising the renminbi and driving funds into the underperforming A-share market. “There are two main purposes of the regulations. First, the long-term goal of internationalising the renminbi and second, the short-term goal of stimulating the A-share market by drawing additional funds that will stabilise and develop the market,” said Fan Jiannian, a partner with Gide Loyrette Nouel in Shanghai. Under the new rules, RQFII funds can now invest in mainland initial public offerings, convertible bond sales, interbank bonds, options and share placements. Expanding the investment scope is good news for investors because under the previous rules, investments were limited to stocks and bonds. But by far the biggest change concerns eligibility. “All the famous Hong Kong financial institutions will in principal be included, but the regulations are unclear over foreign institutions and how they can qualify with their principal business operation in Hong Kong,” said Fan. The CSRC is expected to issue further details over eligibility soon. However, it is clear that the Commission is committed to welcoming greater participation in the A-share market from other players. “The rules are not clear on exactly what type of entities outside of the Hong Kong

subsidiaries of PRC financial institutions are qualified to apply for RQFII, but it appears that those same institutional investors that are qualified under the QFII scheme may qualify for RQFIIs,” said Tse. It remains to be seen which foreign financial institutions will be allowed to participate, but the rules do not mean the CSRC is completely releasing its power, as every RQFII is still subject to its approval. The move will develop Hong Kong as a renminbi financial centre, something Hong Kong and Beijing have been pushing for a long time. The rules also lift restrictions previously in place that 80% of proceeds could be invested in fixed return securities, like bonds and fixed return funds and 20% in the A-share market.

The Circular aids in developing Hong Kong as a reminbi financial centre

新聞分析

This means QFIIs can now invest all their proceeds into China’s main market. “This makes RQFIIs a lot more attractive than previously to foreign investors who are looking to allocate their funds to renminbi investments,” said Tse. Whether investors will chose to invest all their proceeds in the A-share market remains to be seen. It is thought they will still invest a large percentage in fixed return securities to minimise risk. However, it is interesting that the CSRC has removed the requirement they previously put in place to limit risk. “It is interesting that the restriction has been lifted and it is a good trend as it is not the CSRC who decides investment thresholds anymore, but market participants,” said Fan.

中

國證券監督管理委員會於 2011 年 12 月公佈了人民幣合格境外機構投資者 (RQFII) 方案的細節。當時，該方案允許設立在內地的香港基金管理和證券公司的子公司申請配額，以使用在香港籌集的人民幣投資內地證券市場。根據於2012年3 月 1 日發佈並於當日生效的《人民幣合格境外機構投資者境內證券投資試點辦法》和《關於實施<人民

幣合格境外機構投資者境內證券投資試點辦法>的規定》，投資的範圍擴大了，因此現在情況已大不相同。邦信陽律師事務所上海辦公室的合伙人謝鴻銘說：“最新的人民幣合格境外機構投資者辦法是中國證券監督管理委員會在去年放寬合格境外機構投資者細則基礎上的延續。”他還補充道：“中國證券監督管理委員會正力求繼續向外國長期機構投資者開放國內資本市場，以此給市場帶來更多的長期資本。” 該條例還允許中國大陸的商業銀行和保險公司的香港子公司進入國內市場和投資地方金融機構。證監會正努力實現其最終目標，也就是使人民幣國際化並推動資金進入表現差強人意的 A 股市場。 “該法規有兩個主要目的：第一，實現人民幣國際化的長期目標；第二，吸引額外資金穩定併發展市場，以實現刺激 A 股市場的短期目標。”基德律師事務所上海辦公室的合伙人範建年說。根據新條例，人民幣合格境外機構投資者的投資資金可在大陸進行首次公開發行股票、可轉換債券銷售、銀行間債券、期權和股票配售方面投資。擴大投資範圍對於投資者來說是個好消息，因

銀行及融資 INDIA

為按照之前的條例，投資者只能對股票和債券進行投資。但到目前為止，最大的變化在申請資質方面。範建年說：“大體上，所有著名的香港金融機構都會擁有資格，但關於外國機構投資者的界定以及該如符合所謂‘主營業務在香港’的這個資質的問題上規定的還不是很清楚。” 證監會有望於近期公佈關於申請資質的其他細節。然而，該委員會很明確地做出承諾，歡迎其他市場參與者進入 A 股市場。 “除了中華人民共和國金融機構的香港子公司之外，具體甚麼樣的實體才有資格申請人民幣合格境外機構投資者，該條例在這一方面還不明確。但看來那些根據合格境外機構投資者方案(QFII)擁有資格的機構投資者可能也具有人民幣合格境外機構投資者資格(RQFII)。”謝鴻銘說。哪些外國金融機構將會獲准參與，這一點還有待觀察。但該條例並不意味著中國證券監督管理委員會完全放棄了其權力，因為每個人民幣合格境外機構投資者仍然要經過中國證券監督管理委員會的審批。此舉會使香港發展成為人民幣金融中心，而這正是香港和中國政府長期以來的努力目標。之前的條例規定，投資者可以將 80% 的神情資金投資到固定收益證券中，例如債券和固定收益基金，而剩下的 20% 可以投資到 A 股市場中。該條例目前也取消了這一限制。這說明合格境外機構投資者現在可以將其所有申請資金投資到中國的主要市場中。謝鴻銘稱：“這讓人民幣合格境外機構投資者這個資質比之前對允許外國投資者購買人民幣投資產品更有吸引力。” 投資者是否會選擇將所有批准資金投入 A 股市場還有待觀察。有人認為這些投資者仍然會將很大比例的收入投入固定收益證券，以使風險最小化。然而，中國證券監督管理委員會已經撤銷之前為限制風險而設立的要求，這一點非常耐人尋味。範建年表示：“有意思的是，現在限制已經取消，而且決定投資門檻的不再是中國證券監督管理委員會，而是市場的參與者，這是一個很好的趨勢。”

中國法律商務2013年回顧

News analysis

Banking & Finance

Leading Banking & Finance Lawyers Banking Ma Chen, Fangda Partners Stanley Chen, Fangda Partners Yvonne Ho, Allen & Overy Hu Tingfeng, Zhong Lun Law Firm William Huang, Fangda Partners

Practice areas: Mr Liu has a diverse corporate and financial practice, with an emphasis on banking and financial services.

Wei Kong, Grandall Law Firm

Professional experience: Mr Liu’s practice is heavily international. He has actively represented a number of international companies and banks in structuring, negotiation, document preparation and rendering of legal opinion in many investment and finance projects. He also represents a number of multinational corporations in entering into China and establishing business across China. He also acts for domestic companies in their investments and acquiring business overseas.

Lu Jianeng, Jun He

Mr Liu is an arbitrator of China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission and also Shanghai Arbitration Commission, a board member of Singapore International Arbitration Centre and visiting law professor of East China University of Politics and Law.

Jeffrey Sun, Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe

Mr Liu was awarded the Legal Personality of the Year 2003 and China Dealmaker of the year 2009 by Asian Legal Business and also was recommended by the Global Leading Lawyers since 2000 continuously by Chambers & Partners and by Asia Law & Practice as a leading lawyer in mergers and acquisitions as well as banking and finance.

Yang Tiechang, Clifford Chance

執業領域：擅長銀行金融收購和兼並法律實務。

James Douglass, Linklaters

專業經驗：曾代理眾多國內外著名銀行參與大量融資項目的結構設計、談判、文件起草和出具法律意見書等工作, 還曾幫助眾多國際金融機構進入中國市場。他還代表眾多跨國公司進入中國市場；同時也代理中國公司在境外投資，為中國公司在境外的商業運作提供結構性的法律解決方案。

Shaun Lee, King & Wood Mallesons David Liu, Jun He (see biography) Shirley Lu, Zhong Lun Law Firm Michael Mei, Llinks Law Offices Charles Qin, Llinks Law Offices Joel Rothstein, Paul Hastings Janofsky & Walker Jeffrey Shen, Fangda Partners David Shen, Grandall Law Firm Jean Thio, Clifford Chance Wang Jian, Jun He Ling Wang, King & Wood Mallesons Roy Zhang, King & Wood Mallesons Zhong Xin, King & Wood Mallesons Project Finance Stephen Harder, Clifford Chance Maggie Lo, Clifford Chance Tom Luckock, Norton Rose Thomas Ng, Linklaters Andrew Ruff, Shearman & Sterling Sean Wang, Shearman & Sterling Danian Zhang, Baker & McKenzie

劉大力律師擔任中國國際貿易經濟仲裁委員會仲裁員、華東政法大學律師學院特聘院長以及新加坡國際仲裁中心董事局的董事。他被ALB評為2003年年度中國法律人物，2008年度最佳中國交易撮合人，在2001至2013年連續被英國Chamber & Partners 評為銀行金融、公司和收購兼並領域傑出律師之一。

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

Source: Asialaw Leading Lawyers 2013

Asia Capital Markets Forum 2013 New products, new issuers and a focus on emerging markets November 27 2013 â&#x20AC;˘ Conrad Hotel, Hong Kong Benefits of attending: n

Examine the new HK sponsor rules and the impact they will have on you

Understand the future of high-yield debt and new structures

Analyse the growing RMB market

Discover the opportunities in trust IPOs

Debate key developments with regulators and rating agencies

Learn about new trends and how they will affect you

Sponsored by

Supported by

Pantone 2955C Black 80% version on white background

Media partners

APSA

Asia-Pacific Structured Finance Association

To register, or for more information: Visit: www.iflr.com/acm13 Email: emerald.mou@euromoneyasia.com Call: +852 2842 6980 version on dark background

APSA

Asia-Pacific Structured Finance Association

Capital Markets

News analysis

CSRC’s reforming chairman steps down

證監會改革派主席離任 CSRC chairman Guo Shuqing stepped down in March. It is unclear why Guo, a dynamic reformer, left and whether his successor will continue his policies | 中國證券監督管理委員會主席郭樹清早前離任。這位充滿活力的改革者為何離任，他的繼任者是否會繼續執行他的政策，這些目前都不明確

hina’s once-in-a-decade power transition was completed during the National People’s Congress (NPC) in March. The ceremony created few surprises as 3,000 deputies gathered to cast votes for Xi Jinping, who replaced Hu Jintao as president and Li Keqiang, who replaced Wen Jiabao as premier. After the closing of the NPC, the country’s top regulator, the China Securities Regulatory Commission, announced that Guo Shuqing would step down as chairman and be replaced by Xiao Gang, chairman of the Bank of China. “Guo enacted many more regulations during his term than any of his predecessors, which helped to enhance transparency of the administration of the capital markets. He also strengthened the punishment for insider trading and issuer and intermediaries’ fraudulent acts relating to the IPO application,” said Dai Guanchun, a capital markets lawyer with Jingtian & Gongcheng in Beijing. The change forms part of a reshuffle of senior finance figures on the sidelines of China’s political transition. For example, Jiang Jemin replaced Wang Yang as head of the State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission on Tuesday.

The reformist Guo became known as a reformer during his 18-month term as chairman. He held a tough stance on insider trading and wanted to remove false financial reporting from the market. Guo hoped tackling these issues

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

would boost investor confidence in the A-share market. Guo once said at a forum in Beijing that his agency would use rigorous measures to clamp down on irregular practices and that this would include amendments to the laws. He made the comment following the release of Guidelines from the CSRC reforming information disclosure and pricing control for initial public offerings (IPOs) in May 2012.

The ambitious chairman kept his word. A report from Sina Finance claimed that over 70 pieces of legislation were amended or issued under Guo. On November 6, the CSRC issued the Tentative Provisions on Strengthening the Regulation of Unusual Share Transactions in Connection with Material Asset Reorganisation of Listed Companies (中國證券監督管理委員

會關於加強與上市公司重大資產重組相關股票異常交易監管的暫行規定), which became effective on December 17 2012. The Provisions formalised many points in an Opinion released two years before on combating insider trading. The Provisions were unique because they clearly provided that if there is insider trading related to the material assets reorganisation by the companies involved, the transaction will be adversely affected. “The insider trading and fraudulent acts punishment potentially changes the role of the CSRC: less approvals and more effort on investigation and punishing illegal acts,” said Dai. Delisting is also a huge problem on China’s capital markets. According to statistics from Shenyin Wanguo Securities cited in the Wall Street Journal around 80 companies in China have been delisted since 1990 with 2,493 companies now listed. Since September 2012, 827 Chinese companies had been delisted since 1990 from global stock markets outside mainland China. Guo sought to change this through rules that sped up the delisting of junk shares, but this rule will not come into effect until 2015. This was unpopular with shareholders as they do not want to see companies they have invested in removed from the market.

Differing views Guo’s departure split opinions. Some market observers praised him for the reforms put in place, while others were angered by some of his policies.

新聞分析

資本市場

Interview | 專訪

Reforming China’s capital markets | 中國資本市場改革 David Fu spent four months at the CSRC as part of their Strategy and Development Committee. Fu shared with David Tring his thoughts on China’s capital markets and what tasks lie ahead for the country’s top securities regulator | 傅志耕律師曾受聘在中國證監會規劃委工作了四個月。傅律師和David Tring分享了他關於中國資本市場的一些觀點，並探討了中國最高證券監管機構所面臨的首要任務 When did you start your legal career? I received a BA in English language from Anhui Institute of Education. I then went on to get a Master of Law degree from the Shanghai Institute of Foreign Trade and finally an LLM from Columbia University. I joined Global Law Office in 2010 and before that I worked at the Beijing, New York and Toronto offices of Shearman & Sterling. Back in 1993, I started my legal career at Shanghai Science & Technology Investment Corporation, a state-owned investment company affiliated with the Shanghai municipal government and a founding shareholder of China Unicom. During that time, I worked on the agreements for the first “Chinese-Chinese -foreign” investment project of China Unicom. What was your role at the CSRC? From February 2013 to May 2013, I worked as a staff member at the Strategy and Development Committee of the CSRC. My main duties included research and creating proposals for solutions to top regulatory issues in China’s capital markets. One of my research reports addressed the issues raised by the overseas red-chip listings by domestic private companies and proposals for effective supervision and regulation of these listings. I found working at the CSRC rewarding as well as challenging. The working style is quite different and the transition from a private practitioner to a regulator also came with challenges. But at the same time you feel a sense of self-achievement when your research papers and proposals are taken into consideration in formulating new rules by CSRC. Daily tasks included meetings with relevant departments within and outside the CSRC to discuss issues facing the Commission and preparing research reports on these issues. What are some of the latest trends in China’s capital markets? Definitely the market structure is becoming more balanced. Previously, the bond market lagged behind the equity markets, but in the past two years, equity financing has lowered, while the bond market has increased. The futures and derivatives market also continues to develop. The investor structure is being improved. At

the end of 2012, retail investor holdings dropped from 26.5% to 25.3%. Institutional investors have experienced rapid growth, along with a rising trend in the number and amount of funds established by institutional investors. There is a wider range of investment products that are being introduced. More and more investment products, like corporate bonds, local government bonds and stock index futures were launched in the past few years to meet the growing demands of the market. How has the departure of Guo Shuqing and the arrival of Xiao Gang changed the dynamics at the CSRC? It is believed that Guo’s appointment as governor of Shandong Province is aimed at promoting him for a more important position in the hierarchy in future. Since taking over as Chairman of the CSRC in late 2011, Guo took significant measures to deepen capital market reform. He wanted to further loosen direct governmental control to shift focus from market access control to supervision on behaviour and operation. He increased the dividend payout by listed companies and built a multi-layered capital market to develop an over-the-counter (OTC) market (the so-called New Third Board and the regional equities trading exchanges). He wanted to encourage more institutional investors, such as social security funds, insurance companies, trust schemes, private

of the freeze on “IPOs,Asthea result Chinese private equity and venture capital markets have faltered and have been reluctant to enter into any new investments | 受IPO暫停的影響，中國私募股權和風險投資市場步履蹣跚，很多私募基金無意開展新投資

”

equity funds and other professional institutional investors to invest in the markets. Lastly, he really tried to strengthen law enforcement in the market. Guo wanted to transform the regulator, shifting it away from controlling access to the market and moving it to a more conventional supervisory role. He earned the respect and confidence of most institutional and retail investors, who believed the reform measures could lead to the healthy growth of the market in the long term. Xiao comes from a banking background and could be more sensitive to preventing systemic risks and promoting the healthy development of the capital markets. Since taking over as Chairman of the CSRC in mid March this year, Xiao took significant measures to crack down on illegal acts and violations, such as the financial fraud of Wanfu Biotechnology. He wanted to refocus on CSRC’s regulatory and supervisory role to strengthen law enforcement in the market and protect the lawful interests of investors. I would say that Xiao’s top priorities are to: • deepen the IPO system reform to improve the stock offering and pricing mechanisms; • strengthen the supervision of law enforcement and the protection of investors; • prevent systemic risks and promote the healthy development of the capital market; • accelerate the construction and development of a multi-tiered capital markets; • launch reforms to facilitate mergers and acquisitions of listed companies. How is the IPO freeze affecting the market? China’s IPO market has been frozen since October 2012 and the pipeline of pending applications for the Shanghai and Shenzhen exchanges has risen to 746 companies as of August 1, 2013 (excluding 270 companies whose IPO applications have been terminated by the CSRC during its review in 2013). In part, the freeze is a response to investor concerns that new issues would put downward pressure on existing share prices. It is also a result of orders from the CSRC last year that underwriters and accountants for all IPO applicants review financial statements for accuracy and completeness and submit those to

中國法律商務2013年回顧

Capital Markets

the CSRC. The self-review process was completed at the end of May and the CSRC is conducting its own review of applicants. In early June this year, the CSRC issued draft new rules on the IPO system reform for public comments. The rules are aimed at boosting protection for investors. The CSRC plans to resume IPOs after the new rules go into effect. However, the plan to restart IPOs has taken a hit as a result of the stock market meltdown following the interbank liquidity crisis. Since it is already August now, it is likely that the applicants would be asked to supplement financials for the past six months in 2013 for CSRC review, which could further delay the timetable for restarting IPOs. As a result of the freeze on IPOs, the Chinese private equity and venture capital markets have faltered and have been reluctant to enter into any new investments. What do you think the tasks ahead are for the CSRC? China’s capital markets have gone through accelerated reform and development in the past few years. The CSRC has been very proactive and responsive in navigating this reform and development. Since the global financial crisis and despite world economic growth remaining sluggish and financial deleveraging still underway, the CSRC has implemented a series of proactive and targeted policies and measures to ensure the sound development of China’s capital markets. We expect the CSRC will continue to play an essential role in carrying out reforms as well as maintaining the sound development of the capital markets. I would say some of tasks for this year for the CSRC are to: • reform the IPO system and restart IPOs; • continue to build up a multi-layered capital market with the New Third Board being the main focus of development; • build up an integrated bond trading market and to launch treasury futures (approved by the State Council in early July and to be launched in September); • encourage long-term capital to invest into the market; • strengthen law enforcement in the market and crack down on illegal acts and violations. 您從何時開始了您的法律職業生涯？我起初在安徽教育學院外語系獲得文學學士學位，然後在上海對外貿易學院獲得法學碩士學位，後來在美國哥倫比亞大學取得法學碩士學位。我於2010年加入環球律師事務所，在此之前，我曾在美國謝爾曼•思特靈律師事務所的北京、紐約和多倫多辦公室工作。早在 1993年，我的法律工作開始於上海科技投資公司，這是一家上海市政府下屬的國有投資公司，也是中國聯通的創始股東之一。在那段期間，我主要負責中國聯通首個“中中外”投資項目協議的設計和起草工作。您在證監會的職責是甚麼？ 2013年2月至2013年5月期間，我曾受聘在中國證監會規劃委工作。我的主要職責包括對

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

News analysis

The CSRC has implemented “a series of proactive and targeted policies and measures to ensure the sound development of China’s capital markets | 中國證監會毅然採取了一系列具有前瞻性和針對性的政策和措施，保證了中國資本市場的健康和穩定發展

”

中國資本市場的前沿監管問題進行研究，並提出解決問題的建議。我的研究報告之一闡述了境內民營企業海外紅籌上市所帶來的問題，並提出了針對此類上市的有效監管的建議。在證監會的工作讓我受益良多，但也充滿挑戰。工作方式和風格迥異，並且從專業律師到證券監管者的角色轉換也充滿挑戰。但是，當管理層在制定有關證券監管新規時將你的研究成果和建議納入考慮，你將能夠獲得自我成就感。我的日常工作包括參加證監會內外相關部門的會議，討論證券監管面臨的重要問題，並就這些問題進行研究。中國資本市場最近的動向有哪些？市場結構明顯越來越趨於平衡。債券市場曾經落後於股票市場，但在過去的兩年裡，股權融資份額有所下降，債券市場融資明顯上升。期貨和衍生品市場也在繼續發展。投資者結構正在不斷改善。2012年末，散戶持倉比例從上一年26.5%下降到25.3%。機構投資者正在快速增長，伴隨而來的是機構投資者設立的基金的數量和資金量也在快速增長。引進的投資產品種類更加廣泛。越來越多的投資產品，例如公司債券、地方政府債券和股指期貨在過去幾年中陸續啟動，以滿足市場不斷增長的需求。郭樹清的離任和肖鋼的接任對證監會發展有何影響？業界認為郭樹清被任命為山東省省長是為了將來將其升遷至更加重要的職位。自2011 年末接任證監會主席以來，郭樹清採取了許多重大措施，深化中國資本市場改革。他希望進一步放寬政府的直接管制，將重點從市場准入管制轉變到行為和運作的監督上。他提倡上市公司進行股利分紅，建立多層次資本市場以發展場外交易（OTC）市場（所謂的“新三板”和區域性股權交易市場）。他希望鼓勵更多的機構投資者，例如社保基金、保險公司、信託計劃、私募基金以及其他專業機構投資者參與市場投資。最後，他盡力試圖加強市場執法和監管。郭樹清想要轉變監管者，將其從管制市場准入轉變到更加傳統的政府監督角色。他獲得了大多數機構投資者和散戶的尊重和信任，他們相信，從長遠來看，這些改革措施能夠使中國資本市場獲得健康的發展。肖鋼具有銀行背景，可能對防範金融系統風險和促進資本市場的健康發展更加敏銳。

自今年3月中旬接任證監會主席以來，肖鋼採取了一系列重大措施打擊證券市場非法行為和違規案件，例如萬福生科的財務欺詐。他希望重塑證監會的監管角色，加強證券市場執法力度，保護投資者的合法權益。我認為肖鋼的首要任務是：

• • • • •

深化IPO新股發行體制改革，改進股票發行和定價機制；加強證券市場監管和執法，保護投資者利益；防範金融系統風險，促進資本市場健康發展；加快多層次資本市場的建設和發展；啟動促進上市公司並購的改革。

IPO暫停對市場有何影響？ 2012年10月起，中國的IPO市場被暫停，截至2013年8月1日，上交所和深交所待審批的 IPO申請已增至746家公司（被證監會在2013 年的審查中終止IPO申請的270家公司除外）。在某種程度上，此次暫停部分原因是為了回應投資者擔心新股發行將會導致現行股價下行。它也是緣於證監會去年發佈命令，要求保薦人和審計師就IPO申請進行財務報表的準確性和完整性審查，並將結果提交給證監會。該IPO財務專項核查的自查程序已於今年五月底完成，證監會正在對申請公司的自查報告進行內部審閱。今年6月初，證監會發佈了關於推進新股發行體制改革的意見（徵求意見稿），規定旨在加強對投資者利益的保護。證監會有意在新規定生效後重啟IPO。然而，重啟IPO的計劃受到了銀行間流動性危機帶來的股票市場暴跌的影響。鑒於現在已經是八月份，申請IPO的公司有可能會被要求補充2013年過去6個月的財務資料報證監會審查，這將會進一步延遲IPO重啟的時間表。受IPO暫停的影響，中國私募股權和風險投資市場步履蹣跚，很多私募基金無意開展新投資。您認為證監會今後的任務是甚麼？在過去的幾年間，中國資本市場經歷了加速的改革和發展。中國證監會在領導這些改革和發展方面十分具有前瞻性並積極性。自全球金融危機以來，儘管世界經濟增長持續放緩，金融去槓桿化尚在進行，中國證監會毅然採取了一系列具有前瞻性和針對性的政策和措施，保證了中國資本市場的健康和穩定發展。我們期望證監會繼續引領中國資本市場的改革和創新，為中國資本市場的良好發展保駕護航。我認為證監會今年的主要任務是：

• • • • •

改革IPO新股發行體制，重啟IPO；繼續建立多層次的資本市場，重點發展“ 新三板”；建立統一的債券交易市場，啟動國債期貨（已於7月初獲得國務院批准並將於9月開啟）；鼓勵長期資本投入市場；加強證券市場監管和執法力度，打擊非法和違規行為。

新聞分析

many more regulations during his term “thanGuoanyenacted of his predecessors, which helped to enhance transparency of the administration of the capital markets | 郭樹清在任時制定了許多法規，比他的透明度

”

任何一位前任都要多，這提高了資本市場管理的

In particular, local governments did not like the delisting rules as they use listed companies to finance local projects, which then provide tax revenue and jobs. Commercial banks were also unhappy as there is a high chance of credit default when a company is delisted. In order for Guo to tackle insider trading, his IPO review procedure led to a backlog of some 800 firms waiting to list on the country’s capital markets. This had also been a headache for private equity funds as one of the main strategies to exit China is through IPOs. “Guo created hardship for IPO applicants, sponsors as well as accountants and lawyers. But to be fair, he helped to correct wrong doings rampant in the market. I really appreciate his contribution,” said Dai. But some have said that Guo was not reformist enough and he failed to tackle the big issue that investors could not make money off the A-share market. Xiao Gang has been named as the new chairman and his background shows that he is outspoken and interested in understanding foreign markets. “The condition of the market demands more changes, even changes to the reforms by Guo. Xiao has to respond,” said Dai.

中

國十年一度的政權交接於圓滿結束。這一儀式並未創造甚麼驚喜。3000 名代表共聚一堂，投票支持習近平和李克強，前者成為繼胡錦濤之後的國家主席，而後者則繼溫家寶之後擔任總理。全國人民代表大會閉幕後，中國證券

Dai Guanchun, Jingtian & Gongcheng, Beijing 戴冠春，競天公誠律師事務所，北京

業最高監管機構中國證券監督管理委員會宣佈郭樹清主席離任，繼任者是中國銀行董事長肖鋼。 “郭樹清在任時制定了許多法規，比他的任何一位前任都要多，這提高了資本市場管理的透明度。他同時加大了對內幕交易以及發行人與中介機構在首次公開募股申請方面的欺詐行為的懲罰力度。”競天公誠律師事務所北京辦公室的負責資本市場的律師戴冠春說。這一高級金融官員的人員調整是中國政治過渡的一部分。例如，蔣潔敏繼王勇之後擔任國有資產監督管理委員會(國資委)主任。改革派在擔任主席的 18 個月任期內，郭樹清的改革者姿態逐漸為人們所熟知。他對內幕交易採取了強硬的立場，並希望將虛假財務報告從市場中清除。郭樹清希望通過解決這些問題來增強 A 股市場投資者的信心。郭樹清曾經在一場於北京舉行的論壇中稱，其所在機構會採取嚴厲措施打擊不正當做法，其中可能包括對法律進行修改。在他發表這番言論之前，中國證監會於 2012 年 5 月發佈了關於對首次公開募股 (IPO) 的信息披露和定價管理進行改革的指導方針。這位雄心勃勃的主席遵守了他的諾言。新浪財經的一份報導表明，郭樹清在任時修改或發佈的法規超過 70 條。中國證監會於 2012年11 月 6 日發佈了《中國證券監督管理委員會關於加強與上市公司重大資產重組相關股票異常交易監管的暫行規定》，該規定於 2012 年 12 月 17 日生效。該規定將兩年前發佈的一份意見中許

資本市場

多關於打擊內幕交易的要點正規化了。該規定具有獨特的意義，因為它明確規定，如果公司存在與重大資產重組相關的內幕交易，那麼該交易將遭到嚴厲打擊。 “對內幕交易和欺詐行為的處罰潛在地改變了中國證監會的職能：審批程序減少了，而調查和處罰非法行為的力度卻加大了。”戴冠春說。退市也是中國資本市場的一個巨大問題。根據《華爾街日報》(Wall Street Journal) 引用的來自申銀萬國證券公司的數據，自 1990 年起，全國大約有 80 家公司退市，當時的上市公司共 2493 家。而自 1990 年至 2012 年 9 月，中國大陸以外的全球股票市場中共有 827 家中國公司退市。郭樹清試圖制定加快垃圾股退市速度的法規，以改變這種情況。但此法規到 2015 年才會生效。股東們則比較抵觸此法規，因為他們不希望看到自己投資的公司遭到市場的驅逐。看法各異人們對郭樹清的離任抱持不同的觀點。一些市場觀察者對郭樹清做出的改革大加贊賞，而其他人則為他的部分政策所激怒。地方政府尤其厭惡退市法規，因為他們要借助上市公司為當地項目提供資金，從而創造稅收和工作崗位。商業銀行也很不滿，因為公司退市時很有可能會導致信貸違約。郭樹清為瞭解決內幕交易問題，積壓了首次公開募股審查程序方面的工作，800 家公司等待著在中國資本市場上市。這也讓私募股權基金大感頭疼，因為它們退出中國項目的很重要的方法就是將項目做上市。戴冠春表示：“郭樹清給首次公開募股申請者、贊助商、會計以及律師製造了困難。但是公平地說，他幫助糾正了市場中猖獗的違法行為。我很感激他所做出的貢獻。” 但是有些人說郭樹清的改革並不徹底，而且他並未解決投資者無法從 A 股市場中獲利這一大問題。肖鋼被任命為新主席。他的背景表明他直言不諱，並且對國外市場充滿興趣。“市場的狀況需要更多的改變，甚至是改變郭樹清做出的改革。肖鋼必須做出反應。”戴冠春說。

中國法律商務2013年回顧

Capital Markets

News analysis

Private funds finally given regulatory system | 私募基金監管體系最終出台 Fund management companies in China used to face a restrictive investment regime, especially as legislation did not cover privately raised funds. Amendments to the Securities Investment Funds Law have opened up the process | 基金公司在中國過去面對的投資體制具有限制性，主要是由於法律將私募基金排除在外。《證券投資基金法》修正案開啟了私募基金合法化進程

he Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress passed the amendments to the Securities Investment Funds Law on December 28. They came into effect in June this year. Market observers and practitioners have praised the changes to the Law. The CSRC has been focusing on reforms to the fund management sector in recent years and the amendments show their determination to relax the market and begin to bring it in line with international practices. First adopted in October 2003, the PRC Securities Investment Funds Law (中華人民共和國證券投資基金法) applies to public sale of fund shares to raise capital for securities investment funds that are managed by fund managers. The Law went through three reviews before being passed, with research starting in 2008. China’s capital markets have changed dramatically over the past nine years and the amended Law embraces this fact by lifting restrictions on fund investments that affected the performance of funds.

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

For example, private funds were not allowed to invest in stocks issued by the funds of custodian banks. For the first time, the Law includes privately raised funds within its scope. While managers could raise private funds, their operation has been something of a grey area.

Privately raised funds “Considering the amended Law, private funds investing in listed companies are legalised, as long as they fulfil the registration procedures and comply with the requirements – this makes their position much clearer,” said Lawrence Guo, a partner with Jade & Fountain PRC Lawyers in Beijing. Private funds have existed in China’s capital markets for around five years and in that time they have become major investors. The Law was designed to allow the China Securities and Regulatory Commission (CSRC) to regulate these investments. “Once private fund managers and private funds have been regulated by the CSRC, they obtain a legal position to raise money from

qualified investors and manage investor’s assets, which will spur development of private funds in the future” said Sandra Lu, a partner with Llinks Law firm in Shanghai. The Law only includes investment in listed companies – the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) has produced a series of policies and circulars to regulate privately raised funds investing in unlisted companies. Private funds investing in unlisted companies were included in draft versions of the Law, but were removed when it was promulgated. This means that private equity (PE) and venture capital (VC) funds remain outside the scope of the Law. This is logical and consistent with regulatory trends in the US and EU. Since the 2008 financial crisis, government oversight of privately offered funds has increased to eliminate previous regulatory gaps in supervision. “Private funds are permitted to invest in shares publicly issued by the companies limited by shares, bonds, funds, other securities and derivatives recognised by the CSRC,

新聞分析

資本市場

Association has a large number of members, but there are no private fund managers as yet. Now that the Law has come into effect, private fund managers can seek to raise funds. Yang also predicted that: “the CSRC may soon allow securities companies, insurance asset managers and private fund managers, with strong financial standing, three-year profitability and a good track record of securities asset management experience, to be able to manage public funds, which could be a potential competitor to mutual fund managers.” The move can be seen as reflecting CSRC’s resolution to boost and diversify the assets and funds management industry by introducing competitive market players.

全

while PE and VC investing in shares privately issued by unlisted companies should fall under a different regime,” said Lynn Yang, a partner at Norton Rose in Shanghai. However, a PE fund that invests in both private and public funds need to comply with both CSRC and NDRC policies and rules. “This will likely mean dual-governmental filing, registrations and reporting,” said Guo.

Mutual fund managers The Law relaxes many of the restrictions previously in place for fund managers. For example, fund managers of private funds are only required to register with the Asset Management Association of China (AMAC). This is also the same for a post-launch filling. The CSRC used to oversee such registrations and fillings. “The AMAC has been working closely with the CSRC and reports to them over regulatory work like funds filling and registration. Currently, the two organisations are working together on registrations and fillings,” said Lu. The AMAC has recruited additional staff

to deal with the increase in regulatory work. This is seen as a positive move as the CSRC is beginning to loosen its grip on mutual fund managers. Another major change is improving the compliance and risk management of mutual fund managers from the share holder and trading requirements. In the past, the Chinese regulators prohibited directors, supervisors, senior management personnel or other professionals of fund managers to trade shares. “Once the law becomes effective, they or their relatives or interested parties have the green light to make securities investments, but shall be subject to restrictions such as reporting and conflict of interests,” said Yang. The Shanghai-based partner also added that this follows international practices.

Investment Fund Association In June 2012, the Asset Management Association of China was established with all mutual fund managers registering as a pre-condition to raising funds. The

國人民代表大會常務委員會於 12 月 28 日通過了《證券投資基金法》修正案。此修正案將於2013年 6 月生效。市場觀察員及從業人員對這部法律修正案表示贊賞。中國證監會近年來一直在關注基金管理領域改革，此修正案表明他們決心要放寬市場並讓其與國際慣例接軌。《中華人民共和國證券投資基金法》於 2003 年 10 月首次通過，它適用於為基金管理人管理的證券投資基金的公開銷售及募資。該法律修訂案的修訂研究工作從 2008 年開始，修訂案經過三次審查才得以通過。中國資本市場在過去九年裡經歷了翻天覆地的變化，為適應這一形勢，修訂後的這部法律取消了對影響基金表現的基金投資的限制。例如，過去私募基金不得對托管銀行基金髮的股票進行投資。這部法律有史以來第一次將私募基金納入其範圍之中。雖然管理人可以募集私有基金，但對這些基金的運作卻沒有相關法律可以依據。私募基金九州豐澤律師事務所北京合伙人郭林軍說：“根據修訂後的這部法律，只要私募基金完成註冊程序並遵守相關要求，他們就可以合法地向上市公司投資，這使他們的地位變得更加明朗。” 私募基金進入中國資本市場已有五年左右。在這段時間裡，他們已經成為主

中國法律商務2013年回顧

Capital Markets

Leading Capital markets lawyers Stephen Birkett, Morrison & Foerster Tom Chau, Herbert Smith Freehills Wayne Chen, Llinks Law Offices Jianxiang Ding, Jun He He Fei, Haiwen & Partners Michael J Fosh, Reed Smith Christophe Han, Llinks Law Offices Edward Lam, Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom Terence Lau, Hogan Lovells Eugene Lee, Latham & Watkins Maochang Li, Jun He Xiaocheng Li, Jun He William Liu, Linklaters Xiaohu Ma, Morrison & Foerster Filip Moerman, Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton Kevin Qian, MWE China Law Offices Alan Seem, Shearman & Sterling Chun Wei, Sullivan & Cromwell Wei Xiao, Jun He Xiaolei Yang, King & Wood Mallesons Sherry Yin, Morrison & Foerster Hongjiu Zhang, Jingtian & Gongcheng Yongliang Zhang, King & Wood Mallesons Anthony Zhao, Zhong Lun Law Firm Zheng Su, King & Wood Mallesons William Zheng, Perkins Coie Jonathan Zhou, Fangda Partners

Source: Asialaw Leading Lawyers 2013

要投資者。這部法律旨在讓中國證券監督管理委員會能夠管理這些投資。 “只要私募基金管理人和私募基金受到證監會約束，他們也就同時獲得了一定的法律地位，可以作為合格投資者管理投資人的資產。這可以加快中國的私募基金的發展。”通力律師事務所上海辦事處的呂紅這樣說。這部法律僅涵蓋對上市公司的投資。中華人民共和國國家發展和改革委員會頒布了一系列政策通知，管理對未上市公司進行投資的私募基金。《證券投資基金法》修訂稿草案中曾涵蓋對未上市公司進行投資的私募基金，但在公佈時這部分被刪除了。這說

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

News analysis

明私募股權基金和風險投資基金仍被排除在這部法律的範圍之外。這很合理，而且與美國和歐盟的監管趨勢相一致。自 2008 年金融危機起，政府加強了對私募基金的監督，以消除之前的監管空白。 “私募基金被允許向一些公開發行的股份的公司投資，因為這些公司受到股票、債券、基金以及其他中國證監會認可的金融衍生品發行的限制，但是對於私募股權基金和風險投資基金向未上市公司非公開發行的股份進行投資，就需要一個不同的管理體制。”諾頓羅氏富布賴特律師事務所上海的合伙人 Lynn Yang說。然而，向私募基金和公募基金兩種基金進行投資的私募股權基金需要同時遵守中國證監會和中國國家發改委的政策和法規。“這可能意味著私募股權基金需要在兩家政府部門備案、註冊並向其報告。”郭林軍說。共同基金管理人這部法律放寬了很多之前對基金管理人的限制。例如，私募基金的基金管理人只需要向中國證券投資基金業協會進行註冊即可。基金成立後的備案也是如此。中國證監會過去會對這些註冊和備案進行監管。“中國證券投資基金業協會一直與中國證監會密切合作，就基金備案和註冊等監管工作向後者報告。目前，這兩家組織正在共同處理註冊和備案方面的事宜。”呂紅律師說。中國證券投資基金業協會招募了一批工作人員，以應對監管工作量的增加。人們認為這是一項積極的轉變，因為中國證監會已開始放寬對共同基金管理人的控制。另一項重大轉變是提高了共同基金管理人作為股東的交易方面的合規性監管並改善了風險管理。過去，中國監管機構禁止基金管理人的董事、監事、高級管理人員或其他從業人員對股份進行交易。 Yang 說：“一旦法律生效，基金管理人的董事、監事、高級管理人員或其他從業人員本人、配偶或利害關係人就可以獲准進行證券投資，但是應當遵守申報和利益衝突方面的相關限制。”這位上海的合伙人還補充道，這符合國際慣例。

投資基金業協會中國證券投資基金業協會於 2012 年 6 月成立，所有共同基金管理人必須先註冊才能募集基金。該協會成員眾多，但目前其中還沒有私募基金管理人。該法於六月份生效，私募基金管理人會試圖籌募基金，這種情況即有望改變。 Yang 同樣預測道：“中國證監會可能很快就會允許財務狀況優秀、三年盈利且證券資產管理經驗記錄良好的證券公司、保險資產管理人和私募基金管理人管理公募基金。這些證券公司、保險資產管理人和私募基金管理人可能會是公募基金管理人的潛在競爭者。” 在人們看來，此舉反映了中國證監會的堅定決心——通過引進具有競爭力的市場對手，讓資本和基金管理產業迅速發展、趨於多樣。

private “fundOnce managers and private funds have been regulated by the CSRC, they obtain a legal position to raise money from qualified investors and manage investor’s assets, which will spur development of private funds in the future | 只要私募基金管理人和私募基金受到證監會約束，他們也就同時獲得了一定的法律地位，可以作為合格投資者管理投資人的資產。這可以加快中國的私募基金的發展

”

Sandra Lu, Llinks, Shanghai 呂紅，通力律師事務所，上海

新聞分析

競爭法

How the Qihoo v Tencent case affects China’s anti-monopoly regime | 奇虎訴騰訊案對中國反壟斷機制的影響 Guangdong Higher People’s Court has ruled against Qihoo in a dispute over market dominance. The Court’s comprehensive 80-page decision shows that it is taking anti-monopoly cases seriously | 廣東高級人民法院判定奇虎在關於市場支配地位的糾紛中敗訴。法院長達 80 頁的綜合判決表明法院已開始重視反壟斷案件

n a battle between two of China’s largest internet companies – Qihoo 360 and Tencent – the Guangdong Higher People’s Court held that Tencent had not abused its market dominance under the PRC Antimonopoly Law (中華人民共和國反壟斷法). The Court released its decision on March 28, almost 18 months after Qihoo filed the lawsuit accusing Tencent of abusive practices and seeking damages of Rmb150 million ($24 million). Qihoo maintains that Tencent abused its dominant market position by introducing bundle sales to prevent users from installing Qihoo’s antivirus software.

Qihoo failed to prove that Tencent abused its market share

The case has attracted much attention from practitioners as this is the first antitrust case to be heard by a higher people’s court. It has also sparked interest from the public as both companies have hundreds of millions of users. “This is the most significant decision since the Supreme People’s Court issued its rules to promote antitrust litigation between private parties. The court seems to have taken its task very seriously by identifying the various elements that Qihoo had to prove,” said Sébastien Evrard, an antitrust partner with Jones Day in Beijing. Evrard was referring to the Provisions on

Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Law in Trials of Civil Dispute Cases Arising from Monopolistic Acts (關於審理因壟斷行為引發的民事糾紛案件應用法律若干問題的規定) released on May 4 2012 and effective as of June 1 2012. The Provisions are the first court interpretation on civil anti-monopoly disputes and present a procedural framework for litigation. They were praised for lowering the burden of proof and expanding the scope of expert witnesses.

The Judgment “The Judgment contains exhaustive analysis, especially in terms of market definition and market dominance. As for the plaintiff ’s arguments, there were five different issues and it addresses each one. It shows the seriousness of the Court in establishing the issues,” said Qi Fang, an antitrust lawyer with Fangda Partners in Beijing. The Court’s Judgment is around 80 pages long. This is rare in China as judgments are short and often fail to expand on the issues. But the country’s Anti-monopoly Law is young, with few cases making it before the courts. There is also much discussion that judges are ill-equipped to handle antimonopoly cases. The Court wanted to disprove this notion through the Qihoo v Tencent judgment. Evrard argues this is a result of the SPC Provisions: “The courts feel more confident to handle cases since the Provisions came out, as it gave

中國法律商務2013年回顧

News analysis

Competition

This is the most significant decision since the “Supreme People’s Court issued its rules to promote antitrust litigation between private parties

| 這是自最

高人民法院出台有關鼓勵反壟斷訴訟以來最重要的判決

”

confidence to the courts by explaining what they need to do.” In antitrust cases it can be difficult to meet the burden of proof for dominant market position. However, Evrard and Qi both argue that burden of proof is not the problem; rather it is how the court interprets the evidence that is presented to them. “In this case, when the Court defined the scope of the relevant product market different from the plaintiff ’s presentation, the Court also refused to consider some of the plaintiff ’s evidence about the defendant’s market power. The problem then exists how plaintiffs can prove market dominance if they do not know the scope of the market courts are going to adopt in cases. The Judgment is also a reminder that market share is only one contributory factor in proving market dominance, ” said Qi. “It all depends on how the judges will assess market share. Some judges have lower thresholds, while others might feel they have not been presented with enough evidence,” said Evrard.

Technological innovation China Daily quoted chief judge Zhang Xuejun as saying: “Those who gain a dominant market position through technological innovation, better operation and management, and price advantages are not the targets of the country’s anti-monopoly law.” In high technology markets it is common that dominant players come and go. Tencent currently holds a dominant market position, but this may change,

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

Sébastien Evrard, Jones Day, Beijing Sébastien Evrard, 眾達律師事務所,北京

especially when a new innovative product is launched. “In high tech markets, market share does not necessarily reflect market power. Dominant positions are often transitory so that courts should be very careful when they are asked to intervene,” said Evrard. The case will undoubtedly aid future antitrust judges and plaintiffs, as they will feel more comfortable with the Law. It is thought Qihoo will appeal the case to the Supreme People’s Court. “This is a good thing for antitrust litigation, as I believe this will be the first case before the SPC,” said Qi.

奇

虎360和騰訊是中國最大的兩家互聯網公司，在這兩家公司之間的訴訟大戰中，廣東高級人民法院認為，根據《中華人民共和國反壟斷法》，騰訊並未濫用其市場支配地位。

法院於 3 月 28 日發佈判決，這距離奇虎對騰訊提起訴訟，控告其濫用行為並索取 1 億 5 千萬人民幣（約合 2400 萬美元）賠償金已經將近 18 個月。奇虎堅持認為騰訊濫用市場支配地位，利用捆綁銷售來阻止用戶安裝奇虎殺毒軟件。作為高級人民法院審理的首起反托拉斯案件，此案引起了業內人士的廣泛重視。由於兩家公司都擁有上億用戶，所以也引起了公眾的關注。眾達律師事務所北京代表處的反托拉斯合伙人 Sébastien Evrard 表示：“這是自最高人民法院出台有關鼓勵反壟斷訴訟以來最重要的判決。法院似乎非常重視這起案件，對奇虎提出的各種證據一一甄別。” Evrard 提到的法規是於 2012 年 5 月 4 日頒布並於 2012 年 6 月 1 日起生效的《關於審理因壟斷行為引發的民事糾紛案件應用法律若干問題的規定》。該規定是法院對民事反壟斷糾紛的首部解釋，並為訴訟提供了程序框架。該規定減輕了舉證責任，擴大了專家證人的範圍，獲得了公眾的好評。判決書 “判決書包含了詳盡的分析，特別是在市場定義和市場支配地位方面。該判決逐一解答了有關原告抗辯的五個不同問題。這體現了法院查實這些問題時表現出的認真態度。”方達律師事務所北京辦公室的反托拉斯律師祁放如是說。法院判決書共約 80 頁。這在中國非常罕見，因為中國的判決書通常篇幅較短，而且往往不會對問題進行詳細闡述。但中國的反壟斷法尚不成熟，法院很少審理此類案件。也有人認為法官不具備處理反壟斷案件的素質和能力。法院想通過奇虎訴騰訊一案的判決來改變這種觀念。Evrard 認為這正是最高人民法院的規定所帶來的結果，他說：“該規定的出台讓法院在處理案件時有理有據，因而感覺更有把握。” 反托拉斯案件中，雙方可能難以證明擁有市場支配地位的舉證。然而，Evrard 和祁放都認為問題不在於舉證，而在於法院如何理解呈遞給他們的證據。“在這起案件中，法院在認定相關產品的市場範圍與原告的陳述不一致的同時，也拒絕考慮原告提供的關於被

新聞分析

告市場支配力的證據。問題就在這裡：如果原告不瞭解法院將在案件中採納的市場範圍，又如何證明被告擁有市場支配地位呢？判決書也提醒我們，在證明是否擁有市場支配地位時，市場份額僅僅是其中一個影響因素。”祁放說。 Evrard 表示：“這完全取決於法官對市場份額影響的評定。某些法官的評定標準比較低，而其他法官則可能認為證據不足。”

科技創新《中國日報》援引審判長張學軍的話說：“我國反壟斷法並不針對通過科技創新、優質運營管理以及價格優勢而獲得市場支配地位的公司。” 在高科技市場，主導者更換交替是很正常的。雖然騰訊目前保有市場支配地位，但情況不會一直如此，尤其是在創新的新產品推出後。 “在高科技市場，市場份額與市場支

競爭法

配力沒有必然聯繫。支配地位往往轉瞬即逝，所以法院收到請求進行干預時必須小心處理。”Evrard 說。該案件無疑會對將來反托拉斯案的法官和原告起到一定的作用，因為他們會對法律更有信心。人們認為奇虎將上訴至最高人民法院。“這對於反托拉斯訴訟是有利的，我相信這將是最高人民法院受理的首起反托拉斯案件。”祁放說。

NDRC cracks down on anti-competitive behaviour | 國家發改委嚴厲打擊反競爭行為 The landmark fine imposed on international LCD manufacturers shows China’s changing attitude to anti-competitive behaviour | 中國對跨國 LCD 製造商開出的前所未有的巨額罰單表明瞭中國對反競爭行為的態度轉變

n January 4 2013, the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) fined Samsung, LG and four Taiwanese companies Rmb353 million ($57 million) for engaging in price fixing practices between 2001 and 2006. The NDRC is an administrative agency that oversees and enforces illegal pricing related activities that go against the PRC Anti-monopoly Law (中華人民共和國反壟斷法) (AML) and the PRC Pricing Law (中華人民共和國價格法). The fine imposed on the multinationals has attracted much media attention. “This is the first time that China is jumping on the bandwagon of international cartel enforcement and the other reason that sets this apart is the massive fine by Chinese standards,” said Marc Waha, an antitrust partner at Norton Rose Fulbright in Hong Kong.

The issue of timing Due to the time when the illegal conduct took place, the 1998 Pricing Law was applied

instead of the AML, which was promulgated in 2008. The NDRC’s press release highlighted that the LCD price-fixing cartel would have received a much heftier fine if enforcement had been under the AML. Under the Pricing Law, the penalty is up to five times the illegal gain, under the AML, it is between 1% to 10% of the turnover. Despite the potential for a higher fine under the AML, that Law has more scope for leniency and has more exempted circumstances. “It has not been settled whether turnover means worldwide turnover or just the turnover in China. The NDRC could easily take the view that it will be worldwide, as done in Europe. China would probably take the same attitude, but it is not absolutely clear in the law,” explains Frank Schoneveld, an anti-monopoly partner at MWE China Law Offices in Shanghai. Waha told China Law & Practice that there have been a number of cases where the infringing conduct has taken place after the

AML came into effect and was still investigated under the Pricing Law. Practitioners attribute this to the possibility that enforcement agencies feel more confident operating under the Pricing Law. Officials are

Leading CompetitionAntitrust lawyers Bee Chun Boo, Baker & McKenzie Nathan Bush, O’Melveny & Myers Ninette Dodoo, Clifford Chance Adrian Emch, Hogan Lovells Sébastien Evrard, Jones Day Nicholas French, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer Michael Han, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer Martyn Huckerby, King & Wood Mallesons Stanley Jia, Baker & McKenzie Zhong Lin, Chen & Co Susan Ning, King & Wood Mallesons Francois Renard, Allen & Overy Peter Wang, Jones Day Feng Yao, Broad & Bright

Source: Asialaw Leading Lawyers 2013

中國法律商務2013年回顧

Competition

expected to enforce more under the new Law as they become accustomed to the provisions and how they should be applied in practice.

Clarification needed In the NDRC’s public statement, the commission claimed to have discovered during its investigation that the conspiring participants had 53 meetings in Taiwan and South Korea between 2001 and 2006 to discuss the illegal conduct involved. Article 2 of the Pricing Law stipulates that jurisdiction is only granted over “pricing acts that are carried out within the PRC”. It has been suggested that since the meetings took place outside the PRC, the NDRC did not have the basis to apply the Pricing Law to this case. “The NDRC would not have accepted a

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

News analysis

proposition like that. The Commission has taken the approach that it is where the pricing behaviour occurs and not where the agreement was made that matters,” said Schoneveld. The issue of limitation periods under the PRC Administrative Penalty Law (中華人民共和國行政處罰法) has also raised confusion. It is not clear from the NDRC’s press release when the limitation period began or when the investigation had officially begun. “There seems to be a misconception of the limitation period,” said Schoneveld. Under the Administrative Penalty Law, the statute of limitations for violations under the Pricing Law or AML is two years. It seems that if the NDRC has not taken action for two years, then the case would have disappeared. However, the NDRC has its own

interpretation as the wording of the translation essentially says that if within two years of the illegal conduct, it has not been discovered, then the regulator cannot take action. “At least in other legal systems, when one speaks of a two year limitation period you are talking about a four year maximum period. That is how it would work in other jurisdictions, but the rules are not clear in China,” said Waha.

Warning sign Throughout 2012, records indicate that the NDRC had imposed sanctions totalling a mere $3 million for the entire year. This is a stark contrast to the single fine that has been imposed on the LCD price-fixing cartel. Compared with other Asian jurisdictions,

新聞分析

China has been known to be lax on enforcement of monopolistic practices. “If you just compare India, which started enforcing more or less around the same time China did, in the last two years of enforcement, you can see there had been more than $1.4 billion in fines imposed,” said Waha. The landmark fine indicates a new era of strict enforcement and companies operating in China should take this as a sign to be more cautious. Multinationals need to review their China antitrust policy and ensure their Asia operations follows global antitrust policies. The case shows administrative agencies are becoming strict on anti-competitive practices. However, more transparency and guidance on the thought process involved when assessing anti-competitive behaviour is needed, especially as China struggles with this new concept.

013 年 1 月 4 日，國家發展和改革委員會判定三星、LG 以及四家台灣公司在 2001 至 2006 年間涉嫌價格操縱，並對上述公司開出了 3.53 億人民幣（約合 5700 萬美元）的罰單。發改委部分的工作就是負責監督違反《中華人民共和國反壟斷法》和《中華人民共和國價格法》的非法價格行為並執法。這一次對跨國公司的巨額罰款引起了媒體的廣泛關注。 “這是中國首次加入國際卡特爾制裁浪潮。讓該事件格外引起注意的另一個原因是根據中國標準確定的巨額罰款。”諾頓羅氏律師事務所香港辦事處的反托拉斯合伙人Marc Waha 說。時間問題考慮到非法行為發生的時間，法院採用的是 1998 年價格法，而不是 2008 年頒布的反壟斷法。國家發改委的新聞稿強調指出，如果依照反壟斷法進行制裁，將對操縱 LCD 價格的卡特爾施以更高罰款。根據價格法，罰金不得高於非法收入的五倍；而根據反壟斷法，罰金的範圍是營業額的 1% 至 10%。儘管根據反壟斷法處理案件可能會導致罰款金額增加，但是這部法規卻提供了更多寬大處理的餘地，也給出了更多的豁免情況。 “關於營業額究竟是指世界範圍內

競爭法

This is the first time that China is jumping on the “bandwagon of international cartel enforcement and the other reason that sets this apart is the massive fine by Chinese standards | 這是中國首次加入國際卡特爾制裁浪潮。讓該事件格外引起注意的另一個原因是根據中國標準確定的巨額罰款

”

Marc Waha, Norton Rose Fulbright, Hong Kong Marc Waha,諾頓羅氏律師事務所, 香港

的營業額還是中國範圍內的營業額，這個問題尚未得出結論。國家發改委很可能採取歐洲的做法，採用世界範圍內的營業額。雖然中國很可能持相同態度，但是法律中卻沒有指明。”元達律師事務所上海辦公室的反壟斷合伙人Frank Schoneveld 解釋道。 Waha 告訴我們，很多案件中的侵權行為發生在反壟斷法生效之後，卻仍依據價格法進行調查。業內人士將這種現象的原因歸結為執法機構對依照價格法進行操作更有把握。人們期望執法人員在熟悉規定以及瞭解規定的實際應用方法之後能夠更多地按照這部新法規執法。必要說明國家發改委的公開聲明稱，該委員會在調查中發現上述企業曾於 2001 至 2006 年間在台灣和韓國召開共計 53 次會議，合謀商討非法行為。價格法第二條明確規定，司法管轄權僅適用於“在中華人民共和國境內發生的價格行為”。有人認為這些會議在中華人民共和國境外召開，所以國家發改委無權對該案件實施價格法。 Schoneveld 說：“國家發改委不會認同這種觀點。發改委的態度是，關鍵在於價格行為發生的地點，而不是協議達成的地點。” 《中華人民共和國行政處罰法》規定的時效期限同樣引起了人們的不解。國家發改委的新聞稿未明確指出時效期限的開始日期或官方調查的開始日期。 Schoneveld 說：“人們似乎誤解了時效期限的概念。”根據行政處罰法，違

反價格法或反壟斷法的行為的法定訴訟時效為兩年。似乎可以這樣理解，如果國家發改委在兩年內未採取任何措施，案件將不成立。不過國家發改委也有自己的解釋，聲明大體上指出，如果非法行為在發生後的兩年期限內未被揭發，那麼監管機構就無法採取相應措施。 “至少在其他法律體系中，人們提到的兩年時效期限其實最長可達四年。這是其他司法轄區的可能做法，但中國的法規尚不明確。”Waha 說。敲響警鐘記錄表明，國家發改委在 2012 年全年所實施制裁的累計罰款金額僅達三百萬美元。這與對操縱 LCD 價格的卡特爾開出的單張罰單形成了鮮明的對比。相比亞洲其他法律轄區，中國對壟斷行為的處罰素來不嚴厲。 “就拿印度來做比較。印度開始實施反壟斷法的時間與中國差不多，但最近兩年執法期間的罰金已超過 14 億美元。”Waha 說。這張前所未有的巨額罰單表明中國進入了嚴格執行反壟斷法的新時代，在華經營的公司應以此為鑒，提高警惕。跨國公司需要反思其在華的反托拉斯政策，確保其在亞洲的經營行為與全球反托拉斯政策同步。這起案件表明行政機構對反競爭行為的態度變得嚴厲。然而，反競爭行為評定過程中思維過程的透明度還有待提高，同時需要對這一思維過程予以更多指導，特別是在中國努力適應這一新概念之時。

中國法律商務2013年回顧

COMPETITION

Insights

Get ready for more enforcement Susan Ning of King & Wood Mallesons outlines the key developments in competition law in the last year, including Qihoo 360 v Tencent, and gives some predictions for next year 1. What have been the key changes in legislation affecting competition over the past 12 months? The most important anti-monopoly legislation during the past year was the Supreme Peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Court, Provisions on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Law in Trials of Civil Dispute Cases Arising from Monopolistic Acts (the Judicial Interpretation) promulgated by the Adjudication Committee of the Supreme Peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Court on May 3 2012 and implemented from June 1 2012.

a. How did these changes affect the competition regime? The Judicial Interpretation comprises 16 articles covering important issues such as scope of application, standing of plaintiffs, jurisdiction, allocation of the burden of proof, the relationship between civil monopoly dispute cases and anti-monopoly administrative law enforcement, liability for compensation and limitation of actions. They have an extremely important guiding significance for civil anti-monopoly actions in China.

b. Did you expect these changes? Private enforcement of anti-monopoly law is one of the essential integral parts of the entire enforcement of ministerial level laws in other relatively mature jurisdictions. To date, enforcement of the Anti-monopoly Law in China has largely relied on the power of the public authorities, but the issuance of the Judicial Interpretation, supports, at least from a systemic perspective, the value of the existence of private enforcement.

2. What developments are in the running for the next 12 months? In the coming year, the developments that we are anticipating include:

Further improvement of the legal system A legal system always requires continuous improvement in enforcement as this is the only way that it can become more reasonable and more pertinent. In the five years that the Anti-monopoly Law has been formally implemented, the authorities have accumulated extensive law enforcement practical experience. We anticipate that, in the coming year,

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

In the five years that the Antimonopoly Law has been formally implemented, the authorities have accumulated extensive law enforcement practical experience

觀察

the various authorities will further improve the existing systems by combining practical experience with means such as legislation or legal interpretations. More specifically, in the civil procedure field, we anticipate the issuance of more detailed and practicable interpretations addressing the standing of entities involved in civil procedures, litigation methods and the issue of the dovetailing of civil procedure with administrative law enforcement. With respect to review of concentrations of business operators, we anticipate the establishment of a simplified procedure system and the formal issuance of regulations on the attachment of restrictive conditions to concentrations of business operators. As for administrative investigation, we are anticipating the formal issuance of guidelines for anti-monopoly law enforcement in the intellectual property field, the publication of guidelines on the issue of monopolistic agreements in certain industries and explanations of suspected illegal monopolistic acts other than those expressly set forth in the Anti-monopoly Law.

Greater transparency in law enforcement The degree of transparency in the enforcement of the Antimonopoly Law has increased markedly in the past year. In the civil procedure field, the decisions in two cases that have relatively great influence (the Qihoo 360 v Tencent abuse of dominant market position case and the Rainbow Medical v Johnson & Johnson vertical monopolistic agreement case) were made public, with the trial at first instance in the Qihoo case even being broadcast live on the internet. In the administrative investigation field, the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) and State

Author biography Susan Ning Susan joined King & Wood Mallesons in 1995. She is a senior partner and the head of the International Trade, Antitrust & Competition Group. She is one of the first legal practitioners in China to set up an Antitrust and Competition specialist division. Susan’s current practice focuses on two main areas: securing MOFCOM merger clearance for clients; and advising on AML compliance issues. Since the enactment of the AML, Susan has undertaken more than 100 antitrust merger control filings on behalf of blue-chip clients, which consist mostly of multinational companies. Susan took a very active role in terms of assisting and counselling with the Chinese Government on the enactment of the AML, and on drafting regulations and guidelines accompanying the AML. Through these consultations (and through her prior work with the Chinese Government on WTO issues), Susan has built and maintained a close working relationship with the antitrust authorities in China. She is the deputy Chairman of the Antitrust Committee of the China Lawyers Association and is an active participant of the American Bar Association’s antitrust forum. Susan holds a Bachelor of Laws from Peking University and a Masters in Law from McGill University. Susan was admitted as a Chinese lawyer in 1988.

競爭法

Administration for Industry and Commerce (SAIC) published the details of their investigations of major cases on government home pages or in domestic mainstream media. Furthermore, with respect to review of concentrations of business operators, since last year, the Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) has regularly published the names and filing dates of all concentration reviews since the entry into effect of the Anti-monopoly Law. It can be said that the various anti-monopoly authorities have made great efforts to enhance the transparency of law enforcement. We hope that, in the coming year, the authorities can continue in this spirit, disclosing to the public more information on the application of discretion involved in the admission of facts, interpretation of the law, law enforcement and review processes, thereby further increasing the transparency of law enforcement.

Increase in the number and influence of cases With the accumulation of experience by the anti-monopoly law enforcement authorities and the increase in the competition awareness of the public, we foresee that there will be more antimonopoly law enforcement and civil anti-monopoly cases in the coming year. The status of the Anti-monopoly Law in the overall legal system will also rise and genuinely fulfil its role as the “constitution of the economy”.

3. Over the past 12 months, have you seen the Antimonopoly Law applied fairly to both domestic and foreign businesses? Objectively speaking, the implementation of the Anti-monopoly Law in China has essentially achieved equality between domestic and foreign companies. Among the cases investigated and dealt with by the NDRC and the SAIC, a large percentage have targeted the acts of domestic enterprises. In terms of the amounts of the fines imposed, no special consideration has been given to domestic enterprises either. For example, in the Maotai/Wuliangye case investigated and dealt with by the NDRC at the beginning of 2013, each company was fined in excess of Rmb200 million, the highest fine amounts imposed in all final administrative investigation cases to date.

4. What are some the highlights of the year regarding AML cases? How do these help in understanding how the AML law is applied? The anti-monopoly cases in the past year whose influence is relatively high include:

LCD case Strictly speaking, the LCD case was in fact investigated and handled under the Pricing Law because the violation occurred before the the Anti-monopoly Law came into effect. However, this case involved typical cartel behaviour, targeted what is in global antimonopoly enforcement history a very representative case and the

中國法律商務2013年回顧

COMPETITION

Insights

law enforcement process additionally involved the application of extremely important systems under the Anti-monopoly Law, i.e. the tip reporting system and the leniency system. Accordingly, it will, in respect of future law enforcement relating to horizontal agreements under the Anti-monopoly Law, have extremely valuable referential significance.

Do not overlook the effect that a China review of a concentration of business operators could have on a transaction

Maotai/Wuliangye case The Maotai/Wuliangye case is the first vertical monopolistic agreement case investigated and dealt with under the Antimonopoly Law available through public channels. Furthermore, as at July 2013, the fines imposed are the largest ever imposed in any administrative investigation case.

Qihoo 360 vs Tencent This abuse of dominant market position case is the first civil procedure case available through public channels in which systematic professional anti-monopoly legal and economic analyses were carried out and is, to date, the civil anti-monopoly case available through public channels with the highest subject amount.

5. What practical advice would you give to foreign companies about to engage in an acquisition that would trigger an AML review? Do not overlook the effect that a China review of a concentration of business operators could have on a transaction. As in the majority of jurisdictions, a review of a concentration of business operators in China takes the form of advance filing. That is to say that a transaction that requires a filing may not be carried out until the review approval decision has been obtained. As China has not yet established a rapid review mechanism, and as MOFCOM has relatively few case handling officers, the time required for case reviews is relatively long. Accordingly, we have seen numerous transactions that are held up for a long time because the China review of the concentration of business operators has not passed, which has a significant impact on the company. It is best if an enterprise can, at the acquisition transaction feasibility assessment stage, consider the requirements for the review of the concentration of business operators in all jurisdictions, including China.

6. There has been much talk about MOFCOM streamlining the approval process for simple mergers. How will these simple mergers be classified and who will it affect? The principal criterion for the simplified review procedure for business operator concentrations is the shares of the relevant market of the business operators involved in the concentration. Accordingly, the soon to be issued simplified procedure system will greatly increase the speed of reviews of the acquisition transactions of certain financial investors and of transactions that will have a minimal impact on the China market. Furthermore, the establishment of the simplified procedure system may help concentrate the limited

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

review resources on cases that could have the effect of eliminating or limiting competition, thereby accelerating to a certain extent the speed of reviews of cases not subject to the simplified procedure.

7. MOFCOM closely scrutinises M&A transactions. In your experience what is their focus during merger review and how do their practices compare with other foreign competition regulators? In reviewing a business operator concentration, one of the factors that MOFCOM pays the closest attention to is the shares of the relevant market of the business operators involved in the concentration. This point is consistent with other jurisdictions. There are, however, also some differences in the review process. For example, MOFCOM’s requirements in respect of the definition of the relevant market are comparatively stringent, whereas in jurisdictions such as the EU and the US, the importance of defining the relevant market is gradually declining.

8. What has been the highlight of your competition cases over the past 12 months and why was it challenging? During the past year, we accepted many types of anti-monopoly cases, one of which was acting as counsel in the Qihoo 360 v Tencent abuse of dominant market position case. During the first few years after the entry into effect of the Anti-monopoly Law, the anti-monopoly business in China mainly consisted of business operator concentration filings. Although there was a small surge of anti-monopoly actions as early as 2008, in many cases there were no professional anti-monopoly legal and economic analyses and the adducement of evidence was also rather haphazard. Even more turned on a subjective perception of the term “anti-monopoly”. We, on the other hand, in acting as counsel in this case, expended a great deal of effort in anti-monopoly legal analysis and economic analysis, carrying out detailed research and discussion on the definition of relevant market, constitution of abuse and determination of the effect of eliminating or limiting competition. Furthermore, we also brought in expert witnesses to participate in the court investigation for the first time. When the trial at first instance began in the Guangdong Provincial Higher Court in May 2012, it attracted the attention of a wide swathe of the public. The case has yet to conclude and has become the first anti-monopoly litigation case to go to appeal before the Supreme People’s Court. However the case ultimately plays out, its effect on civil Anti-monopoly Law actions in China cannot be ignored.

觀察

9. If you had to give one piece of practical advice to foreign clients about the competition regime in China, what would it be? Do not for a moment believe the adage that “the law does not punish when there is a surfeit of perpetrators” or the claim that “there is no precedent for punishment”. The Anti-monopoly Law in China has only been implemented for a short time, and many punishments that have been published recently are without precedent. Many multinational corporations have been assiduous in their legal

競爭法

compliance work in jurisdictions with sound anti-monopoly laws, but in China have followed the old saying of “when in Rome, do as the Romans do”, treating lightly Anti-monopoly Law compliance work. Such an attitude of relying on luck could result in the company incurring huge losses. Thus, we would recommend that, despite the fact that enforcement of the Anti-monopoly Law in China is only finding its feet, it still deserves to be treated with great seriousness so as to nip any problems in the bud.

中國法律商務2013年回顧

COMPETITION

Insights

預備迎接進一步的執法金杜律師事務所的寧宣鳳律師回顧了過去一年包括奇虎訴騰訊案等的重大競爭法案件和法律動向，並對來年的發展作出預測 1. 過去12個月，有甚麼影響競爭法的主要法規出台？過去一年最重要的反壟斷立法，是最高人民法院審判委員會于2012年5月3日公布，自2012年6月1日起施行的《最高人民法院關于審理因壟斷行為引發的民事糾紛案件應用法律若干問題的規定》（以下簡稱“反壟斷司法解釋”）。 a. 法規如何影響競爭法體系？《反壟斷司法解釋》共16條，涵蓋了適用範圍、原告資格、管轄、舉證責任分配、壟斷民事糾紛案與反壟斷行政執法的關係、賠償責任、訴訟時效等重要問題。對于中國反壟斷民事訴訟的開展具有非常重要的指導意義。 b. 您有否預期到法規會帶來這樣的改變？反壟斷法的私人執行在其他比較成熟的司法轄區是整個部門法執行的一個不可或缺的組成部分。中國《反壟斷法》到目前為止還是以公權力執行為主，但是《反壟斷司法解釋》的出台，至少從制度上支持了私人執行的存在價值。 2. 未來12個月內，將有甚麼新的發展？在未來的一年中，我們期待的發展包括：法律制度進一步完善法律制度總是需要在執行過程中不斷完善，才能更加合理、更具針對性。《反壟斷法》正式實施五年來，主管機關已經積累了豐富的執法實踐經驗。我們期待在未來的一年中，各主管機關能夠結合實踐經驗，通過立法或法律解釋的方式，對于現有制度進一步完善。具體而言，在民事訴訟領域，我們期待就民事訴訟主體資格、訴訟方式及民事訴訟和行政執法的銜接問題出台更為細化和有操作性的解釋；經營者集中審查方面，我們期待簡易程序制度的建立和關于經營者集中附加限制性條件規定的正式出台；行政調查方面，我們期待着有關知識產權領域反壟斷執法的指南的正式出台，部分行業壟斷協議問題的指南的公布，以及對于除《反壟斷法》明確列明的壟斷行為外，其他涉嫌違法的壟斷行為類型的說明。執法更具透明度《反壟斷法》的執法透明度在過去的一年有了非常明顯的提高。在民事訴訟領域，兩起影響比較大的案件（奇虎訴騰訊濫用市場支配地位案和銳邦訴強生縱向壟斷協議案）均對公眾公開了審判決定，其中奇虎案的一審庭審過程還進行了網絡直播。在行政調查領域，發改委和工商總局對于重大案件的調查情況，均在

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

《反壟斷法》正式實施五年來，主管機關已經積累了豐富的執法實踐經驗

觀察

政府主頁上或通過國內主流媒體進行了公布。而經營者集中審查方面，商務部更是從去年起，將自《反壟斷法》生效以來所有集中審查的案件名稱和申報日期予以定期公布。可以說，各反壟斷主管機關在提高執法透明度方面做出了不可忽視的努力。在未來的一年，我們希望各主管機關能夠延續這一精神，向公眾披露更多涉及事實采信、法律解釋、執法和審查過程等有關如何適用自由裁量權的信息，進一步增加執法的透明度。案件數量增加，影響力提升隨着反壟斷執法機關經驗的積累和公眾競爭意識的提升，我們預計在未來的一年，會有更多的反壟斷執法和反壟斷民事訴訟案件。《反壟斷法》在整個法律體系中的地位也會進一步提升，真正發揮其“經濟憲法”的作用。 3. 過去12個月，您認為《反壟斷法》的執行是否對中外投資者一視同仁？客觀地講，中國《反壟斷法》的執行基本做到了“中外平等”。在發改委和工商總局查辦的案件中，很大比例都是針對國內企業的行為。在針對壟斷行為的處罰金額上，也沒有對國內企業有特殊照顧，比如發改委2013年初查辦的茅台/ 五糧液案中，兩家公司各自的罰款金額均超過了人民幣兩億元，是目前已經審結的行政調查案件中罰款金額最高的。 4. 過去一年，有甚麼重大的反壟斷案件？這些案件如何幫助我們瞭解《反壟斷法》的執行？過去一年的時間中影響比較重大的反壟斷案件包括： LCD案（LCD case）嚴格地講，LCD案其實是在《價格法》下查處的，因為違法行為發生在《反壟斷法》生效以前。但是這起案件涉及了典型的卡特爾行為，並且針對的是全球反壟斷執法史中非常具有代表性的案件，執法過程中還涉及了舉報制度、寬大制度等重要的《反壟斷法》下非常重要的制度的運用，因此對于《反壟斷法》有關橫向協議未來的執法有非常寶貴的借鑒意義。茅台/五糧液案（Maotai/Wuliangye case）茅台/五糧液案，是在公開渠道所獲知的第一起在《反壟斷法》下查處的縱向壟斷協議案件。並且截至2013年7月，該案的罰款金額是所有行政調查案件中處罰金額最高的。奇虎訴騰訊濫用市場支配地位案（Qihoo 360 v Tencent）從公開渠道可以獲知的第一起進行系統性專業反壟斷法律和經濟分析的民事訴訟案件，也是目前公開渠道所知的訴訟標的最高的反壟斷民事訴訟案件。 5. 對於將參與可能會引發反壟斷審查並購的外國企業，您有甚麼建議？不要忽略中國經營者集中審查對于交易的影響。

競爭法

如大多數司法轄區一樣，中國的經營者集中審查采取事先申報的形式。也就是說，需要進行申報的交易在取得審查批准決定以前，是不得實施的。由于中國目前尚未設立快速審查機制，並且由于商務部辦案人員數量較少，案件審查的時間比較長，因此我們看到有許多交易由于中國經營者集中審查沒有通過而屢屢延期，對于公司造成了一定程度的影響。企業在進行並購交易可行性評價的階段，最好就能夠將包括中國在內的各司法轄區對經營者集中的審查要求考慮在內。 6. 對于商務部簡化對簡單並購的審查程序，引起了廣泛討論。如何界定簡單並購？哪些投資者或交易會受惠？經營者集中簡易審查程序的標準，主要是參與集中的經營者在相關市場的市場份額。所以對于一些財務投資者的並購交易、以及對中國市場影響很小的交易來說，即將出台的簡易程序制度將能夠極大加快其審查速度。另外，簡易程序制度的確立，可以使有限的審查資源集中在可能具有排除限制競爭效果的案件上，從而在一定程度上加快非簡易案件的審查速度。 7. 商務部嚴格審核並購交易，根據您的經驗，他們審查的重點是什麼？他們的要求與國外其他競爭法管理機關相比有什麼不同？商務部在審查經營者集中的過程中，最關注的一個因素是參與集中的經營者在相關市場的市場份額。這一點與其他司法轄區的主管機關是一致的。在審查的過程中，也存在一些差別，例如商務部對于相關市場界定的要求比較嚴格，而諸如歐盟和美國等司法轄區，正在逐漸淡化相關市場界定的重要性。

作者簡歷寧宣鳳寧宣鳳律師于1995年加入金杜律師事務所，現任金杜律師事務所國際貿易和反壟斷反不正當競爭業務部負責人。寧律師擅長辦理經營者集中反壟斷申報、反壟斷及反不正當競爭合規、和反壟斷訴訟相關的法律事務。自2008年反壟斷法立法伊始，寧律師已代理超過100家大型企業（大部分為跨國公司）向中國反壟斷主管部門進行並購中的反壟斷審查申報。在《反壟斷法》生效以前，寧律師就積極參與中國反壟斷立法活動。在2008年《反壟斷法》生效以後，寧律師參與了眾多《反壟斷法》配套規章的制定。通過參與反壟斷立法活動，以及之前在有關WTO事項上與政府機關的合作，寧律師與中國的反壟斷執法機構建立並保持了良好的工作關係寧律師現擔任全國律協反壟斷委員會副主任，並積極參加美國律師協會反壟斷論壇的各項活動。寧宣鳳律師畢業于北京大學，獲法學學士學位；後就讀于加拿大McGill大學，獲法學碩士學位。寧宣鳳律師于1988年獲得律師資格。寧宣鳳律師的工作語言是中文和英文。

中國法律商務2013年回顧

COMPETITION

Insights

不要忽略中國經營者集中審查對于交易的影響 8. 請列舉一起您在過去12個月所處理過的重大案件。案件有什麼具挑戰性的地方？奇虎訴騰訊濫用市場支配地位案。在過去的一年，我們承接了更多類型的反壟斷案件，其中就包括代理奇虎訴騰訊濫用市場支配地位案。在《反壟斷法》生效後的前幾年間，國內的反壟斷業務基本上是以經營者集中申報為主的。雖然早在2008年就有了一波反壟斷訴訟的小高潮，但其中很多案件都沒有專業的反壟斷法律和經濟分析，舉證等方面也比較隨意，更多是停留在對于“反壟斷” 的感性認識上。而我們在代理這起案件中，做了大量的反壟斷法律分析

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

和經濟分析的工作，從相關市場界定，到濫用行為的構成，以及排除、限制競爭效果的認定，均進行了詳盡的研究和論證，而且還首次引入了專家輔助人參與法庭調查。2012年5月份案件在廣東省高院一審開庭時，引起了公眾廣泛的關注。這個案件目前尚未審結，並成為第一起在最高人民法院進行二審的反壟斷訴訟案件。不論案件最終的結果如何，它對于中國《反壟斷法》民事訴訟的影響都會是不可忽略的。 9. 如果要您向外國客戶提出一項關于競爭法的具體建議，哪會是什麼？不要存在“法不責眾”，以及“沒有處罰先例”的僥幸心理。中國《反壟斷法》的實施時間還很短，近期公布的許多處罰都是前所未有的。許多跨國公司在反壟斷法完善的司法轄區相關的合規工作做得很好，但是在中國卻“入鄉隨俗” ，不重視反壟斷法合規工作，這種僥幸的心理可能會給公司造成巨大的損失。因此我們建議，儘管中國《反壟斷法》的執法剛剛起步，也一定要引起重視，防患于未然。

Dispute Resolution

News analysis

How to resolve the CIETAC dispute: rebranding | 如何調解貿仲委 (CIETAC) 糾紛：重建品牌 The bitter dispute between CIETAC and its sub-commissions that has cast a shadow over dispute resolution in China may finally be over with the establishment of the Shanghai International Arbitration Centre | CIETAC 與其分會之間的激烈糾紛為中國的爭端解決業務蒙上了一層陰影，不過隨著上海國際仲裁中心的建立，這層陰影終將散去

t has almost been a year since CIETAC’s amended Arbitration Rules came into effect on May 1 2012. After those new Rules came out, the Shanghai sub-commission of CIETAC declared that it was an independent arbitration body and would follow its own rules and appoint its own panel of arbitrators. The South China sub-commission in Shenzhen followed Shanghai, creating a public battle involving China’s oldest arbitration institution. Financial gains, independence and objections to the amended Arbitration Rules were all given as reasons for the breakaway. Following three months of announcements and counter-announcements, CIETAC Beijing suspended authorisation of both commissions. At the end of 2012, in an announcement dated December 31, it terminated this authorisation, forbidding the Shanghai and Shenzhen sub-commissions from using the CIETAC name and logo. “It appears that, over this period, CIETAC Beijing also established its own sub-commissions in these cities, meaning that, for a time at least, there were in existence rival CIETAC sub-commissions in those locations, each claiming legitimacy and the support of different judicial bodies,” said Matthew Townsend of Norton Rose Fulbright in Beijing.

SHIAC According to an announcement on its website, as of April 11, the former CIETAC Shanghai sub-commission has rebranded and

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

renamed itself as the Shanghai International Arbitration Centre (SHIAC). SHIAC will also be known as the Shanghai International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (SIETAC).

However, the abbreviation SIETAC is not formally in use, as it is thought to be too similar to CIETAC. “We have heard nothing to lead us to believe that this Shanghai International Economic and Trade Arbitration

is quite famous and has a long history “withCIETAC a solid reputation and client trust. SHIAC is really a totally new arbitration commission. It will take a lot of work to build up its reputation and that is a big challenge | CIETAC 可能會決定完全收回 CIETAC 上海分會品牌，或在上海開設新的分會，尤其是在名稱和品牌已不再構成問題的現在。上海是 CIETAC 的一個重要市場。可以預見的是，CIETAC 將在這裡投入大量精力

”

Xu Guojian, Boss & Young, Shanghai 徐國建,邦信陽律師事務所,上海

新聞分析

Commission entity is separate or distinct from the newly rebranded SHIAC,” Townsend told China Law & Practice. SHIAC’s own Arbitration Rules will enter into force on May 1, along with its panel of arbitrators. While CIETAC no longer has a sub-commission in Shanghai, it still has a secretariat that administers CIETAC cases. “CIETAC may decide to take the brand CIETAC Shanghai sub-commission back entirely or to open a new sub-commission in Shanghai, especially as the name and brand is no longer an issue. Shanghai is an important market for CIETAC and it is foreseeable that they will make great efforts in it,” said Xu Guojian, a dispute resolution lawyer with Boss & Young in Shanghai. The move by SHIAC mirrors steps taken by CIETAC’s former Shenzhen commission, which has rebranded itself as the South China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission or Shenzhen Court of International Arbitration. But the rebranded arbitration centre will be starting from scratch in terms of its credibility and reputation. “CIETAC is quite famous and has a long history with a solid reputation and client trust. SHIAC is really a totally new arbitration commission. It will take a lot of work to build up its reputation and that is a big challenge,” said Xu. But SHIAC does have support. Shanghai is becoming more important in terms of world economics and the Shanghai Municipality has given its full support to the new centre. This will be advantageous considering that parties in Shanghai have three choices for their dispute resolution needs.

Confusion remains While many had hoped the announcement of the rebranded SHIAC had resolved the dispute, confusion remains as the centre’s Arbitration Rules state that it will accept cases where parties have stipulated CIETAC Shanghai as the place of arbitration. “Parties with arbitration clauses specifying administration by ‘CIETAC Shanghai’ will continue to fear for the certainty and finality of the arbitration process where there remain two entities – in this case CIETAC

爭議解決

Interview | 專訪

Building CIETAC’s global role | 專訪：貿仲裁 (CIETAC) 的全球角色 Last year CIETAC opened its first Arbitration Centre outside mainland China. David Tring spoke to CIETAC Hong Kong’s Secretary General, Wang Wenying, about the role of the new Centre and CIETAC’s place in global dispute resolution | 去年，中國國際經濟貿易仲裁委員會（以下簡稱貿仲委）在香港設立了首個中國內地以外的仲裁中心。我們的編輯 David Tring 對話貿仲委香港仲裁中心秘書長王文英，討論了新仲裁中心的角色以及貿仲委在解決國際爭議工作中的地位 Why did CIETAC establish a Hong Kong Arbitration Centre? The Hong Kong government is committed to making the territory a leading arbitration centre in Asia, inviting renowned arbitration institutions like the International Court of Arbitration (ICC) and CIETAC to set up Hong Kong branches in order to attract more interested parties to settle disputes here. CIETAC is China’s oldest and most experienced arbitration institution, accepting the majority of foreignrelated arbitration cases in mainland China. Cases involving Hong Kong parties rank second in the total number of cases that CIETAC accepts. CIETAC decided to open the Hong Kong Arbitration Centre to be closer to the parties. It provides another arbitration resolution for parties seeking to settle disputes in Hong Kong. CIETAC Hong Kong Arbitration Centre is the first overseas branch of CIETAC, pushing forward its drive to provide the same services outside mainland China. It is still up in the air whether or not to open another overseas branch – it is up to the development and market demands. In my view, CIETAC will not open another branch outside China in the short term. How will CIETAC’s role in international arbitration change? The role of CIETAC Hong Kong Arbitration Centre is to promote arbitration services as one of the dispute resolution options for interested parties. CIETAC wishes to cooperate with the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC), ICC and other institutions to learn from their international experiences. Establishing the Hong Kong Arbitration Centre will aid in CIETAC’s going global directive and help integrate itself into the international family of arbitration centres. How does CIETAC Hong Kong interact with Beijing? CIETAC Hong Kong Arbitration Centre is a branch

of CIETAC, which was established under Hong Kong law. It bears the role and responsibility of a subcommission of CIETAC as stipulated in the CIETAC Arbitration Rules. According to the existing CIETAC Arbitration Rules, at present, CIETAC Hong Kong Arbitration Centre mainly receives cases where the arbitration agreement is signed as “arbitration in CIETAC Hong Kong Arbitration Centre” or “arbitration in CIETAC Hong Kong”. Meanwhile, for the cases accepted and administered by CIETAC or by other CIETAC subcommissions, CIETAC Hong Kong Arbitration Centre will provide assistance, like arranging oral hearings. How will CIETAC work alongside Hong Kong’s already established arbitration centres? The economic and trade cooperation between mainland China and Hong Kong has deepened after the Closer Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) was released. In the meantime, however, commercial disputes are rising. Backed by a sound legal system and excellent geographic location, Hong Kong has many advantages when it comes to developing international arbitration. Hong Kong has brought together a large number of experienced professionals to assist in resolving disputes through arbitration and mediation. The Hong Kong Government supports arbitration and it has provided initiatives to promote development. Arbitral awards made in Hong Kong can be enforced by the majority of the overseas courts. All of the above are Hong Kong’s advantages to develop arbitration services. CIETAC wishes to learn from the experience of the HKIAC and ICC Asia Office and work together with them to attract more parties to settle their disputes in Hong Kong and to develop Hong Kong arbitration services. Each arbitration centre has its own advantages and characteristics of arbitration procedures. Interested parties may make their choice among them.

中國法律商務2013年回顧

Dispute Resolution

Which rules govern CIETAC Hong Kong? At present, CIETAC Hong Kong applies to the Arbitration Rules of CIETAC – the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission Arbitration Rules 2012. Unless parties have agreed otherwise, the arbitration place of the cases accepted by CIETAC Hong Kong is Hong Kong, and then the Hong Kong Arbitration Ordinance should be complied with. For this reason, if CIETAC’s existing Arbitration Rules conflict with the Hong Kong Arbitration Ordinance, the Ordinance should be followed. Considering that CIETAC Hong Kong Arbitration Centre will be subject to dual regulations (Hong Kong Arbitration Ordinance and CIETAC Arbitration Rules), CIETAC is planning to amend its existing rules in due course, possibly adding a special chapter for its Hong Kong practice, as well as its charge standards here. The Panel of Arbitrators of CIETAC will be recommended in the cases of CIETAC Hong Kong Arbitration Centre and the parties may appoint arbitrators from outside the Panel. How is the docket looking for CIETAC Hong Kong? CIETAC Hong Kong Arbitration Centre was only just established, so no cases have been accepted yet. However, in the past, CIETAC has received cases that required them to be heard in Hong Kong and we know there is demand here. CIETAC has dealt with many cases where both parties come from outside mainland China. We believe Hong Kong’s established law environment will facilitate CIETAC Hong Kong. We hope that both Chinese and overseas business groups will consider CIETAC Hong Kong as its solution to settle disputes. 為甚麼貿仲委要在香港設立仲裁中心？香港政府致力於將香港打造成為亞洲領先的仲裁中心，力邀國際仲裁法院 (ICC) 和中國國際經濟貿易仲裁委員會 (CIETAC) 等知名仲裁機構來港設立分支機構，以吸引更多的利益相關團體來港解決爭議。貿仲委是中國成立最早、最有經驗的仲裁機構，受理中國大陸地區的大多數涉外仲裁案件。涉及香港相關方的案件數佔貿仲委受理案件總數的比例高居第二位。因此，貿仲委決定開設香港地區仲裁中心，以便與各相關方保持更加緊密的聯繫。同時這也為香港地區尋求解決爭議的相關方提供了另一種仲裁解決方法。貿仲委香港仲裁中心是貿仲委設立的首個海外分支機構，推動實現其在中國大陸以外地區提供相同仲裁服務的願景。是否要開設其他海外分支機構仍然懸而未定，這要根據發展情況以及市場需求而定。在我看來，貿仲委在短期內不會再開設其他海外分支機構。貿仲委在國際仲裁中的角色將發生甚麼變化？貿仲委香港仲裁中心的角色是促進仲裁服務成為利益相關團體可選擇的爭議解決方法之一。貿仲委希望與香港國際仲裁中心 (HKIAC)、國際仲裁法院 (ICC) 以及其他相關機構合作，以學習他們的國際仲裁經驗。香港仲裁中心的成立將有助於貿仲委步入全球指令，並幫助其自身融入仲裁中心的國際大家庭。

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

News analysis

貿仲委香港分會與北京總部之間是甚麼關係？貿仲委香港仲裁中心是依據中國香港特別行政區法律制度設立的貿仲委下屬分支機構。根據《中國國際經濟貿易仲裁委員會仲裁規則》規定，香港仲裁中心需承擔其作為貿仲委分會的對應職責。根據現有的《中國國際經濟貿易仲裁委員會仲裁規則》，目前貿仲委香港仲裁中心主要受理的是仲裁協議簽署為“中國國際經濟貿易仲裁委員會香港仲裁中心仲裁”或“中國國際經濟貿易仲裁委員會香港分會仲裁”的案件。同時，貿仲委香港仲裁中心還會對由貿仲委或其他貿仲委分會受理和管理的案件給予協助，如安排口頭聽證。貿仲委如何與香港地區已成立的其他仲裁中心合作？自《內地與香港關於建立更緊密經貿關係的安排》(Closer Economic Partnership Agreement, CEPA) 簽署後，中國大陸與香港地區間的經濟與貿易合作得到了深化。不過與此同時，商務糾紛也在不斷增加。依託完善的法律體系和出色的地理位置，香港特區在發展國際仲裁方面具有諸多優勢。香港地區聚集了大批有經驗的專業人士，他們協助人們通過仲裁和調解解決爭議糾紛。香港特區政府支持仲裁並推出多項舉措以促進發展。大多數海外法院都可以執行在香港地區做出的仲裁裁決。上述幾點都是香港特區在發展仲裁服務方面的優勢。貿仲委希望學習香港國際仲裁中心 (HKIAC) 和國際仲裁法院 (ICC) 亞洲辦事處的豐富經驗，並與這些機構緊密合作以吸引更多相關方來港解決糾紛併發展香港地區的仲裁服務。每個仲裁中心的仲裁程序都有一定的優勢和獨特的特點。相關各方可以根據自己的需求進行選擇。貿仲委香港分會受到哪些規則的制約？目前，貿仲委香港分會適用貿仲委的仲裁規則 –《中國國際經濟貿易仲裁委員會仲裁規則》（2012 版）。除非相關各方另有約定，貿仲委香港分會受理案件的仲裁地點是香港特區，且應遵守中國香港特別行政區《仲裁條例》。因此，如果貿仲委的現有《仲裁規則》與香港特區的《仲裁條例》相衝突，應遵循香港特區的《仲裁條例》。考慮到貿仲委香港仲裁中心同時受到兩個條例規定（香港特區《仲裁條例》和《中國國際經濟貿易仲裁委員會仲裁規則》）的制約，貿仲委計劃在適當的時候對現有規則進行修訂，可能會加入適合香港特區實情和收費標準的特別章節。貿仲委香港仲裁中心受理案件時，會推薦貿仲委仲裁員名冊，但相關方也可以委派名冊以外的其他仲裁員。貿仲委香港分會受理仲裁案件的效果如何？貿仲委香港仲裁中心才剛成立不久，所以還沒受理過任何案件。不過，貿仲委曾經受理過要求在香港聆訊的案件，所以我們知道這裡有這樣的仲裁需求。貿仲委曾經處理的許多案件中都是當事雙方全部來自中國大陸以外地區。我們堅信香港特區現有的法律環境一定能夠促進貿仲委香港分會迅速發展。我們希望無論中國本土或海外的商業組織，都能將貿仲委香港分會視作他們解決爭議的一種方法途徑。

Beijing’s new Shanghai sub-commission and the recently re-branded SHIAC – which each claim the right to administer the resulting arbitral proceedings” said Townsend. This will prove problematic as one party may choose CIETAC and the other SHIAC, two different arbitration destinations. “Clients must be careful and ensure they are very clear on defining which arbitration institution they wish to administer arbitration,” said Xu.

IETAC 修訂的仲裁規則於 2012 年 5 月 1 日生效，至今已一年多。新規則出台之後，（前）CIETAC 上海分會宣佈其為獨立的仲裁機構，將遵循自己的仲裁規則並啓用自己的仲裁員名冊。位於深圳的（前）華南分會緊隨上海分會的腳步，從而引發了一場波及中國最早成立的仲裁機構的公開大戰。人們認為，導致這次分裂的原因主要在經濟收益、獨立地位以及對仲裁規則修訂案的上面存在異議。這些公告和應對公告發佈之後的三個月後，CIETAC北京中止了對這兩家分會的授權。2012 年末，CIETAC 北京發佈了一份標注日期為 12 月 31 日的公告，宣佈終止對兩家分會的授權，禁止上海分會和深圳分會使用 CIETAC 的名稱和標誌。諾頓羅氏事務所北京辦公室的 Matthew Townsend 說：“看來，在這段時間內，CIETAC 北京也在這些城市設立了自己的分會。這意味著上述地區至少暫時存在作為競爭對手的 CIETAC 分會，而各家仲裁機構紛紛宣稱自己具有合法性，且支持不同的司法機關。” 上海國際仲裁中心 (SHIAC) 4 月 11 日，原 CIETAC 上海分會在其網站上發表一份公告，宣佈重建品牌並更名為上海國際仲裁中心 (SHIAC)。SHIAC 又稱作上海國際經濟貿易仲裁委員會 (SIETAC)。不過，SIETAC 這一簡稱與 CIETAC 過於相似，所以未得到正式採用。Townsend 告訴我們：“根據目前所瞭解的情況，我們貿仲委上海分會與近來採用新名稱的SHIAC是同一家機構。” SHIAC 於 5 月 1 日開始啟用自己的仲

爭議解決 INDIA

新聞分析

裁規則以及仲裁員名冊。雖然 CIETAC 已沒有上海分會，但是仍設有秘書處，以管理 CIETAC 案件。 “CIETAC 可能會決定完全收回 CIETAC 上海分會品牌，或在上海開設新的分會，尤其是在名稱和品牌已不再構成問題的現在。上海是 CIETAC 的一個重要市場。可以預見的是，CIETAC 將在這裡投入大量精力。”邦信陽律師事務所在上海負責爭議解決的律師徐國建說。原 CIETAC 深圳分會採取了與 SHIAC 相同的做法，重建品牌並更名為華南國際經濟貿易仲裁委員會，又稱作深圳國際仲裁院。但是重建品牌的仲裁中心可能要從

零開始逐步積累信用並建立聲譽。徐國建說：“CIETAC 名聲響，歷史久，聲譽好，深得客戶信任。而 SHIAC 是一個全新的仲裁委員會。它需要花費大量精力去建立聲譽，這將是一個極大的挑戰。” 不過 SHIAC 也有自己的支持力量。上海在世界經濟中變得愈發重要，而且上海市政府對新成立的仲裁中心予以全力支持。這樣的好處在於，上海的糾紛當事人如果需要仲裁服務，就可以有三種選擇。亂局依舊雖然許多人希望重建品牌的 SHIAC 發佈的公告宣告這場糾紛已經結束，但現在

卻亂局依舊：根據該中心的仲裁規則，若案件當事人約定將 CIETAC 上海作為仲裁機構，則案件仍由該中心受理。 Townsend 說：“如果仲裁條款指定案件交由‘CIETAC 上海’負責，那麼當事人仍會擔憂仲裁過程的確定性和終局性，因為同時有兩個機構（有可能是 CIETAC 北京在上海新設立的分會，也可以是剛剛重建品牌的 SHIAC）宣稱有權負責最終仲裁程序。” 如果一方當事人選擇 CIETAC 而另一方選擇 SHIAC，雙方向兩家不同機構提交仲裁請求，則會帶來很多問題。徐國建說：“客戶必須仔細一點，確保他們已表明希望由哪家仲裁機構負責仲裁。”

CIETAC goes international with HK subcommission | CIETAC 在香港設立分會，走國際化路線 CIETAC’s new sub-commission in Hong Kong shows a determination of the organisation to become a leading player in global dispute resolution | CIETAC 在香港設立了一家新的分會，這表明 CIETAC 決心在世界糾

Jin Denning, King & Wood Mallesons Fei Ning, Jun He Gary Gao, Duan & Duan

紛調解領域躋身領先地位 n September 24, the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC) launched its sub-commission in Hong Kong. The decision to set up the first CIETAC branch outside mainland China shows the desire to persuade more multinational companies to use the institution. “By opening in Hong Kong, CIETAC may hope to attract more international parties, as opposed to primarily domestic parties. This may serve to enhance CIETAC’s reputation as an institution for international disputes,” said Edmund Wan, a partner of King & Wood Mallesons in Hong Kong.

Leading Dispute Resolution lawyers

Gao Yifeng, Global Law Office

Enforcement Enforcement of a CIETAC award issued in Hong Kong is expected to be treated the same as awards issued by the HKIAC or ICC in Hong Kong. Wan explains: “There should also be no difference in terms of enforceability under the New York Convention and under the Arrangement Concerning Mutual Recognition of Arbitration Awards between the Mainland and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region”. Care should be taken when drafting arbitration agreements as parties need to specify which governing law will apply and may

Ji Nuo, Fangda Partners Gong Jun, Jun He Frank Liu, Chang Tsi & Partners (see biography p.51) Kang Ming, Fangda Partners Maarten Roos, R&P China Lawyers Jin Saibo, Commerce & Finance Law Offices Helen H Shi, Fangda Partners May Tai, Herbert Smith Freehills Jingzhou Tao, Dechert Bai Tao, Jun He Bao Wei, Zhong Lun Law Firm Ji Xiang, Fangda Partners Xiusong Xing, Global Law Office Ariel Ye, King & Wood Mallesons Yan Zhang, HaoLiWen Partners

Source: Asialaw Leading Lawyers 2013

中國法律商務2013年回顧

Dispute Resolution

later have implications for enforcement. For example, the PRC Arbitration Law (中華人民共和國仲裁法) allows six months for a party to apply for an award to be set aside, while the Hong Kong Arbitration Ordinance allows for 30 days.

CIETAC goes global To become a truly international arbitration centre, CIETAC needs to build its reputation so that international parties choose it for disputes even when there is no Chinese element. “CIETAC is determined to expand its influence. The CIETAC Hong Kong branch is another attempt to hear some cases which do not have a Chinese element and will be purely international arbitration. This is the

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

News analysis

goal,” said Tim Meng, managing partner at GoldenGate Lawyers in Beijing. In May this year new CIETAC rules came into effect and are in line with international practices. Christopher To, a professor of arbitration and dispute resolution at City University Hong Kong points out that the CIETAC rules are flexible. There is a lot of room for party autonomy and parties may agree in their arbitration agreement for other rules to apply, for example the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) rules, which is the standard for many agreements. Choosing CIETAC Hong Kong as the place of arbitration can offer advantages that other institutions cannot. For example, the new Rules allow the tribunal to grant interim

relief measures, but this is not permissible under Chinese law, as only PRC courts have this power. “CIETAC Rules that provide for the tribunal to be able to grant interim relief would only apply to CIETAC arbitrations held outside of the PRC, in Hong Kong, for example,” said Wan. Although this move provided a vital boost to the chances of CIETAC becoming a global institution, the new Rules have lead to a disagreement between the Beijing head commission and the Shenzhen and Shanghai sub-commissions. As the new Rules became effective, the Shanghai sub-commission of CIETAC announced that it was an independent arbitration body and would follow its own rules.

爭議解決 INDIA

新聞分析

會。CIETAC 決定在中國大陸境外開設首家分支機構表明其希望吸引更多跨國公司。金杜律師事務所的香港合伙人雲匡彥表示：“CIETAC 可能希望通過在香港開設分會來吸引更多國際當事人，而不是僅僅主要為國內當事人提供服務。這有助於建立 CIETAC 作為國際糾紛調解機構的聲譽。” 執行環節人們期望 CIETAC 在香港所發佈的裁決能夠像香港國際仲裁中心 (HKIAC) 或國際仲裁法院 (ICC) 的裁決一樣得到強制力。雲匡彥解釋道：“根據《紐約公約》以及《關於內地與香港特別行政區相互執行仲裁裁決的安排》，可執行性方面不應存在任何差別”。當事人在起草仲裁協議時須指定採用哪種適用法律，之後這可能會影響執行，所以當事人需要仔細一些。例如，根據《中華人民共和國仲裁法》，當事人可在六個月內申請撤銷裁決，而根據《香港仲裁條例》，這一期限僅為 30 天。 CIETAC 走向世界要想真正成為國際性仲裁中心，CIETAC 還需要建立自己的聲譽，這樣即使國際上某些糾紛與中國無關，當事人也會選擇 CIETAC 進行仲裁。

This prompted a response from CIETAC in Beijing reinforcing that all sub-commissions and branches were under their remit. The South China sub-Commission in Shenzhen soon followed Shanghai. Beijing CIETAC then sent its own arbitrators to administer cases in Shanghai, while the breakaway group is also administering disputes. The disagreement has cast a shadow over dispute resolution arbitration in China. The launch of the Hong Kong subcommission expands CIETAC arbitration. It offers new opportunities but it is not yet clear whether parties will choose the Centre if their contracts do not have a Chinese element.

月 24 日，中國國際經濟貿易仲裁委員會 (CIETAC) 在香港開設新分

金闕律師事務所的管理合伙人孟霆說：“CIETAC 已決心擴大影響力。CIETAC 設立香港分支機構是其嘗試受理與中國無關的案件，所以香港分會將會是純粹的國際性仲裁機構。這就是它的目標。” 今年五月，與國際慣例保持一致的 CIETAC 新規則開始生效。香港城市大學仲裁和糾紛調解教授陶榮指出，CIETAC 規則非常靈活。規則讓當事人享有很大的自治空間，當事人可在仲裁協議中約定採用其他規則，如作為許多協議標準的聯合國國際貿易法委員會 (UNCITRAL) 的商事仲裁規則。選擇 CIETAC 香港作為仲裁機構可以帶來一些其他仲裁機構無法實現的優勢。例如，在香港的規則允許仲裁庭實施臨時性救濟措施，這在中國的法律規定下是不允許的，因為只有中華人民共和國法院才擁有此項權利。

opening in “HongByKong, CIETAC may hope to attract more international parties, as opposed to primarily domestic parties. This may serve to enhance CIETAC’s reputation as an institution for international disputes | 可能希望通過在香港開設分會來吸引更多國際當事人，而不是僅僅主要為國內當事人提供服務。這有助於建立 CIETAC 作為國際糾紛調解機構的聲譽

”

Edmund Wan, King & Wood Mallesons, Hong Kong 雲匡彥,金杜律師事務所,香港

雲匡彥說：“允許仲裁庭實施臨時性救濟措施的 CIETAC 規則僅適用於中華人民共和國境外（例如香港）的 CIETAC 仲裁。” 儘管這一做法極大地提高了 CIETAC 成為國際性機構的可能性，但新規則導致北京總會與深圳和上海分會之間出現分歧。新規則生效之後，CIETAC 上海分會宣佈其為獨立的仲裁機構，將遵循自己的仲裁規則。CIETAC 北京隨後迅速作出反應，加強對所有分會和分支機構的控制。很快深圳的華南分會也採取了與上海分會相同的做法。之後，北京 CIETAC 派遣自己的仲裁員去上海負責案件，與此同時，脫離北京 CIETAC 的原上海分會也在調解糾紛。這場分歧為中國的糾紛調解仲裁事業蒙上了一層陰影。香港分會的設立擴大了 CIETAC 的仲裁範圍。它提供了新的機遇，但是如果當事人的合同內容與中國無關，是否還會選擇該中心作為仲裁機構呢？讓我們拭目以待。

中國法律商務2013年回顧

Dispute Resolution

Insights

Thinking long term Vincent Mu of Martin Hu & Partners summarises the most important cases of the last 12 months and analyses the latest developments in the CIETAC disputes

1. From your experience, what types of disputes been most common in the past year? Are there any reasons for the growing emergence of these types of disputes? We noticed that a large number of disputes involving long-term performance contracts arose during the past year. So-called long-term performance contracts, as opposed to one-off transaction contracts, specifically include long-term supply contracts, long-term distribution contracts and long-term lease contracts. It is our belief that the increase in these legal actions has clearly been affected by the macroeconomic situation. The slowing down of the economy in China during the past year has made business operators more conservative, with some of them perhaps hoping to recover money by cancelling existing large projects. At a deeper level, the reason lies in the long-term nature of these contracts. Based on the amplification effect of long-term performance, minor discrepancies in core commercial terms translate into huge shortfalls. In the midst of an unstable economic situation, longterm performance contracts appear more fragile than one-off transaction contracts, and give rise to disputes more easily. We would advise readers to pay particular attention to this.

2. What have been the most important cases that you have worked on this year and why were they challenging? What precedents, if any, did they set for litigation and arbitration in China? In the past year, we successfully acted as counsel in several disputes the cause of which lay in contracts for the long-term supply of industrial products. The biggest case involved an amount approaching Rmb10 billion. Notwithstanding the fact that these cases do not have guiding significance as precedents, the experience we gained from them is nevertheless worth sharing. Firstly, these types of disputes have some features in common that are distinct: n

the party wishing to extricate itself from the contract will often make its claim for rescission on the grounds of “material misunderstanding” and “marked lack of fairness”; n the disputed subject amount tends to be rather large, and regardless of the outcome of the trial, the parties and, at times, even third parties are certain to incur a significant loss; n the focus of the dispute will usually be the core commercial terms of the contract; and

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

The slowing down of the economy in China during the past year has made business operators more conservative

觀察

because the interests involved in the cases are huge, it is difficult for the parties to reach a settlement.

We would like to put forward the following recommendations in respect of these types of disputes: A party that wishes to extricate itself from a contract has to take full advantage of the long-term nature of the contract. With respect to its interpretation of the terms “unfair” and “misunderstanding”, it cannot limit itself to the provisions of the contract themselves, but needs to take into consideration the contract term to vividly reflect more specific figures e.g. how large the burden would be were it to fully perform a certain obligation for a certain number of years, or how large a loss it would incur were performance to be carried out at the specified price for a certain number of years. A party wishing to maintain a contract must first duly keep records of the contract negotiation and conclusion stages. This information could serve as important evidence in a future dispute. Secondly, it needs to maintain a high degree of vigilance for a claim by the other party to terminate the contract, and respond to any such claim in strict accordance with the law. Thirdly, communication with its lawyers needs to be given high priority and best efforts made to have them gain a full understanding of the economic factors underlying the relevant commercial terms so that the lawyers can fully explain the economic basis specified in the contract to the judges or arbitrators outside the court debate. Lastly, the boundaries between concepts such as commercial risk, force majeure and change in circumstances need to be strictly delineated so as to establish a robust defensive position for one’s claims.

3. Clients are often concerned that court judgments are not effectively enforced. How do you respond to these concerns and what measures do you recommend to ensure enforcement? We have noticed that the amended Civil Procedure Law implemented from January 1 2013 has bolstered the enforcement of judgments and rulings. In the section on enforcement procedures, the amended Civil Procedure Law has made numerous improvements at the technical level, e.g. a court can not only make inquiries about the deposits of the person subjected to enforcement, but can also make inquiries about their financial assets; entities that are the subject of verifications are no longer limited to banks, and have been expanded to financial institutions such as securities companies. These changes will bring the enforcement work of courts closer in line with current social reality and enhance the effectiveness and practicability of enforcement. Furthermore, the new law further strengthens the measures involved in the enforcement of judgments and rulings, not only expanding the scope of entities required to assist in enforcement, but also greatly increasing the fines imposed for refusing enforcement. These measures will further increase the compulsory nature of enforcement. We believe that the amendment of the Civil Procedure Law

爭議解決

A party that wishes to extricate itself from a contract has to take full advantage of the longterm nature of the contract

provides more robust legislative support for the enforcement of judgments and rulings. However, whether the courts at the various levels will fully implement the new legislation and duly promote the enforcement of judgments and rulings remains to be seen.

4. The CIETAC dispute has over the past year cast a shadow over dispute resolution in China. Can you provide an update of the current situation? In addition, how have you been advising your clients during this dispute? We have noted that at the end of 2012, the Intermediate People’s Court of Shenzhen City rendered a ruling in a case in which an application was made for the vacation of an arbitration award rendered by the South China Commission of the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission. One of the parties in the case claimed that the procedure employed by the South China Commission was illegal on the grounds that the Commission did not apply the new arbitration rules implemented by the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (Beijing) from May 1 2012. The Intermediate People’s Court of Shenzhen City ultimately determined that the South China Commission was an independent arbitration institution and, as such, could apply the arbitration rules that it formulated, and dismissed the application to vacate the arbitration award. However, at the beginning of 2013, it was rumoured that the Intermediate People’s Court of Suzhou City rendered a determination on the validity of an award rendered by the Shanghai Commission of the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission that was completely the opposite of that of the Intermediate People’s Court of Shenzhen City. Based on the doubts as to the status of the Shanghai Commission, the Intermediate People’s Court of Suzhou City rendered a ruling denying enforcement of its award. To date we have not been able to secure the original of the Suzhou court’s ruling through public channels. However, based on the currently available information, both this case and the Shenzhen case are domestic arbitration cases. Based on the requirements of the Supreme People’s Court, if a lower-level people’s court wishes to vacate or deny enforcement of a foreign-related arbitration award, it must submit the award level by level up to the Supreme People’s Court, which will render the final decision. Based on the domestic arbitration nature of the two cases, for the time being we feel that neither of the rulings in either of the cases reflects the judicial attitude of the Supreme People’s Court.

中國法律商務2013年回顧

Dispute Resolution

Insights

We have noticed that the amended Civil Procedure Law implemented from January 1 2013 has bolstered the enforcement of judgments and rulings

According to reports, a party to the Suzhou case has filed an appeal with the Supreme People’s Court. The final ruling of the Supreme People’s Court can be expected soon. At that time, the dust will finally settle in the CIETAC dispute and a clear division of the territories in China’s arbitration sector will be made.

5. During the past year, which judgments rendered by the PRC’s court system have had the most significance, and what effect will they have on future litigation? We would like to bring the outcomes of three cases to the attention of readers; the final judgment rendered in Haifu Investment v Gansu Shiheng by the Supreme People’s Court, the final judgment in Chinachem v China Small and Medium Enterprises rendered by the Supreme People’s Court and the judgment at first instance in Fosun International v Soho China et al rendered by the First Intermediate People’s Court of Shanghai Municipality. The Haifu Investment v Gansu Shiheng case is also known as the first valuation adjustment agreement case. In 2012, in its judgment at second instance, the Gansu Provincial Higher People’s Court found that a valuation adjustment agreement had the nature of a guaranteed payment and, as such, was invalid in accordance with the law, attracting great attention in the industry for a time. In its final judgment, the Supreme People’s Court stated that because the valuation adjustment mechanism between the investor and the target company was inimical to the interests of the target company and the debtors of the target company, it was invalid in accordance with the law. But the court stated that the valuation adjustment mechanism between the investor and the shareholder of the target company, because it did not harm the interests of others and did not violate mandatory provisions of laws, should be recognised as lawful and valid provided that the expression of intent was genuine and valid. This judgment not only soothed the nerves of the investment world that had been stretched taut for some time and recognised the legality of reasonably planned valuation adjustment mechanisms, but the legal analysis may also provide direct guiding significance for other related legal issues. For example, there has been a long debate over the validity of punitive damages clauses specified in contracts but, based on the analysis of the Supreme People’s Court in this case, the validity of relevant arrangements should be recognised so long as the expression of intent is genuine and the interests of others are not harmed. For this reason, we would advise readers to pay close

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

attention to how, in future similar cases, judges of courts at every level render extended interpretations based on the legal basis in the judgment of this case. Notwithstanding the fact that the backgrounds to, and the focuses of, the disputes in Chinachem v China Small and Medium Enterprises Investment and Fosun International v Soho China et al are different, the judgments nevertheless both find their basis in Item (3) of the second paragraph of Article 52 of the Contract Law: “it conceals an illegal objective by giving it a legal form”, both resulting in judgments finding the disputed contracts invalid on this basis. For a long time there was no uniform definition of “it conceals an illegal objective by giving it a legal form”, making it impossible for parties to accurately assess the risk of the invalidity of contracts. With the recent appearance of a large number of disputes over the validity of large or long-term contracts, this shortcoming has become more apparent. Furthermore, the Chinachem judgment has also made the investment world extremely wary, believing that this case could introduce new uncertainty as to the legality of variable interest entity (VIE) frameworks. This is the second round of massive debate on the legality of VIE after the CSRC VIE internal report incident rumoured in 2011. In 2010, the author served as counsel in an arbitration case involving a dispute over the validity of VIEs and successfully secured an arbitration award declaring the relevant agreements invalid (according to reports, this is the only VIE dispute to date in which a juridical outcome has been obtained). However, looking at the legal analysis of the Supreme People’s Court in the Chinachem case, based on the high degree of uncertainty of the above mentioned Item (3) of the second paragraph of Article 52 of the Contract Law, this in fact signifies that the negative attitude of the Supreme People’s Court towards VIEs, entrusted investment and other such attempts to circumvent the law is more extreme than that of the arbitrators above, and should make investors very wary. The author would advise readers to continue to watch whether new disputes over the legality of VIEs appear in the litigation and arbitration fields later.

Author biography Vincent Mu Vincent Mu is a senior associate at Martin Hu & Partners. His practice areas are shareholder and management dispute, commercial contract disputes, labour and employment disputes, corporate, M&A and labour. He graduated from Wuhan University where he received his Doctor of Law. He is a member of Corporate Law Committee of Shanghai Bar Association. His working languages are Chinese and English.

觀察

爭議解決

長期性的問題胡光律師事務所的牟笛律師總結了過去12個月的重大爭議案例，並對貿仲會爭議的最新發展作出分析

1. 根據您的經驗，過去1年，什麼類型的爭議最普遍？什麼原因導致這些爭議的數目上升？我們注意到過去一年期間湧現出大量涉及“長期履行”合同的爭議。所謂“長期履行”合同，是相對“一次性交易”合同而言，具體包括長期供應合同、長期經銷合同、長期租賃合同等。我們認為，這一類型訴訟的出現顯然是受到宏觀經濟形勢的影響。中國經濟過去一年的放緩跡象導致經營者逐步趨于保守，部分經營者可能希望通過取消已有的大型項目回收資金。更深層次的原因則來自于此類合同的“長期性”。基于長期履行的放大效應，核心商業條款上細微的差別都意味着巨大的差額。可見，長期履行合同在動蕩的經濟形勢下比一次性交易合同更顯脆弱，也更容易觸發爭議。我們提請讀者對此予以密切關注。 2. 可否介紹一下今年您曾處理的一起重點案件或訴訟？為甚麼該案件具挑戰性？該案件有否為中國訴訟或仲裁建立先例？過去一年中，我們成功代理了若干起因工業產品長期供應合同引發的爭議，其中最大一宗案件的標的金額接近人民幣100億元。儘管這些案件尚不具有“先例性”的指導意義，但其中收穫的一些經驗仍具有分享的價值。首先，此類爭議具有一些共同的、鮮明的特點： n

希望擺脫合同的一方當事人通常以“重大誤解”和“顯失公平”為由提出撤銷主張； n 爭議標的金額普遍較高，無論審理結果如何，都注定給雙方當事人乃至第三人造成嚴重損失； n 爭議焦點往往指向合同的核心商業條款； n 由于案件涉及的利益巨大，雙方很難達成和解。針對此類爭議，我們提出以下一些建議：對希望擺脫合同的一方而言，要充分利用合同的“長期性”。對“不公” 和“誤解”的詮釋不能局限于合同約定本身，而要結合合同期限直觀呈現出更明確的數字，例如在若干年內全面履行某義務將造成怎樣巨大的負擔，或者在若干年內按照約定的價格執行將造成怎樣巨大的損失。對于希望保住合同的一方而言，首先務必要妥善保留合同磋商、締結階段的記錄。這些信息可能在未來的爭議中成為重要證據；其次要對另一方當事人“

中國經濟過去一年的放緩跡象導致經營者逐步趨于保守中國法律商務2013年回顧

Dispute Resolution

Insights

作者簡歷牟笛牟笛律師是胡光律師事務所的資深律師。他處理的業務包括股東與管理層爭議、商業合同糾紛、勞動爭議、企業、並購業務。牟笛律師畢業于武漢大學，具有法學博士學位。他是上海市律協公司法業務研究委員會委員。他的工作語言為中文及英文。

對希望擺脫合同的一方而言，要充分利用合同的“長期性” 解除合同”的主張保持高度警惕，嚴格按照法律規定予以應對；第三則要注重與律師的溝通，力求使律師充分理解相關商業條款背後的經濟因素，使律師能夠在法律攻防以外向法官或仲裁員充分說明合同約定的經濟基礎；最後應該嚴格劃分商業風險、不可抗力、情勢變更等概念之間的界限，為己方的主張構築堅實的防禦陣地。 3. 客戶普遍憂慮法院判決沒有得到有效執行。您對此有何看法？判決沒有執行的，您會建議採取什麼措施？我們注意到2013年1月1日開始實施的經修改的民事訴訟法對裁判執行進行了強化：在執行程序部分，修改後的民事訴訟法作出了多項技術層面的改進，例如法院不僅可以查詢被執行人的存款，還可以查詢金融資產；再如核查對象單位也不再限于銀行，而是擴展到證券公司等金融機構。這些變化將使法院的執行工作更加貼近目前的社會現實，提高執行的效率和可行性。此外，新法還進一步強化了涉及裁判執行的強制措施，不僅擴大了協助執行單位的範圍，同時也大幅增加了對拒絕執行行為的罰款力度，這些措施無疑將進一步提升執行行為的強制性。我們認為，民事訴訟法修改對于裁判的執行提供了更有力的立法支持。與此同時，各級法院能否充分落實新立法，切實推進裁判執行仍有待進一步觀察。 4. 過去一年有關貿仲會的爭議令中國的爭議解決蒙上陰影，現在的情況如何？另外，在爭議期間，您對客戶提供了什麼建議？我們注意到，深圳市中級人民法院在2012年年底曾對一起申請撤銷中國國際經濟貿易仲裁委員會華南分會仲裁裁決的案件作出裁定。該案件中，一方當事人以華南分會沒有適用中國國際經濟貿易仲裁委員會（北京）于2012年5月1日開始實施的新仲裁規則為由主張華南分會程序違法。深圳市中級人民法院最終認定華南分會屬于獨立仲裁機構，有權適用自己制定的仲裁規則，并駁回了撤銷仲裁裁決的申請。

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

然而，2013年初，傳聞稱蘇州市中級人民法院對中國國際經濟貿易仲裁委員會上海分會的一項裁決的效力作出了與深圳市中級人民法院截然相反的認定。基于對上海分會身份的質疑，蘇州市中級人民法院對其裁決裁定不予執行。目前我們并未從公開渠道獲得蘇州市中級人民法院裁定的原文。但根據現有信息來看，本案與深圳案件一樣均屬國內仲裁。根據最高人民法院的要求，下級人民法院如欲撤銷或不予執行涉外仲裁裁決，必須層報至最高人民法院，由後者作出最後決定。基于兩起案件的國內仲裁性質，我們暫時認為兩案件的裁定均不反映最高人民法院的司法態度。據悉，蘇州案件的當事人已經向最高人民法院提起申訴。最高人民法院有望在近期作出最後裁定。屆時，貿仲之爭將真正塵埃落定，中國仲裁界的版圖也將得到一個清晰的劃分。 5. 過去一年中，中國法院系統作出的哪些判決具有指標性意義，它們將對未來的民事訴訟活動產生怎樣的影響？我們提示讀者關注三起案件的裁判結果，分別是最高人民法院對海富投資訴甘肅世恆案作出的終審判決、最高人民法院在香港華懋訴中小企業投資有限公司案中作出的終審判決以及上海市第一中級法院在複星國際訴Soho中國等公司案件中作出的一審判決。海富投資訴甘肅世恆案又稱“對賭協議第一案”。2012 年，甘肅省高級人民法院在本案二審判決中認定“對賭協議”具有保底性質，依法應歸于無效，曾一度引發業內高度關注。最高人民法院在終審判決中指出，投資人與所投資目標公司之間的對賭安排因有損目標公司及目標公司債務人利益依法應歸于無效，但投資人與所投資目標公司股東之間的對賭安排無損他人利益、不違反法律強制性規定，在意思表示真實有效的前提下應當承認其合法效力。這一判決不僅安撫了投資界緊繃已久的神經，承認了合理規劃的對賭安排的合法性，同時其法律分析還可能對其他相關法律問題提供直接的指導意義。例如，當事人在合同中約定的懲罰性賠償條款的效力長期具有爭議。但依據本案中最高人民法院的分析，只要意思表示真實且不損害其他當事人利益，相關安排的效力就應當得到承認。為此，我們提請讀者密切關注未來類似案件中各級法院法官如何對本案判決的法理依據作出延伸解釋。香港華懋訴中小企業投資有限公司案和複星國際訴Soho 中國等公司案儘管爭議背景和爭議焦點均有不同，但判決依據卻殊途同歸地指向《合同法》第五十二條第二款第（三）項“以合法形式掩蓋非法目的”，據此分別判決系爭合同無效。“以合法形式掩蓋非法目的”的內涵長期以來始終缺乏統一的界定，導致當事人無法對合同的無效風險作出準確評

我們注意到2013年1月1日開始實施的經修改的民事訴訟法對裁判執行進行了強化

觀察

估。隨着近期大型、長期性合同效力的爭議的大量涌現，這一缺憾無形中得到了進一步的凸顯。此外，香港華懋案判決還引起了投資界的高度警覺，認為該案可能對VIE架構合法性帶來新的不確定性。這也是2011年傳聞中所謂“證監會關于VIEs的內部報告”事件後第二輪針對VIEs合法性的大討論。2010年，筆者曾代理一起涉及VIEs 效力爭議的仲裁案，并成功獲得宣告相關協議無效的仲裁裁

爭議解決

決（據悉該案也是迄今為止唯一獲得裁判結果的VIE爭議）。但從此次最高院在華懋案件中的法律分析來看，基于前述《合同法》第五十二條第二款第（三）項的高度不確定性，實際上意味着最高人民法院對于VIEs、委托投資等類似法律規避行為的否定態度更甚于之前仲裁員的看法，足以引起投資者的高度警惕。筆者提請讀者繼續關注訴訟、仲裁領域未來一段時間是否會出現針對VIEs合法性的新爭議。

中國法律商務2013年回顧

Intellectual Property & TMT

News analysis

How Chengdu is using IP to attract foreign investment | 成都如何用知識產權發展優勢吸引外商投資 Officials in the western city of Chengdu have used an enhanced IP system to attract foreign investors. David Tring spoke to Ding Xiaobin from the city’s Science & Technology Bureau to find out more about the initiative | 成都政府已開始使用一套更完備的知識產權體系來吸引外國投資者。我們的編輯David Tring有幸採訪了成都市科學技術局副局長丁小斌，瞭解了這項舉措

ituated at the centre of China, Chengdu has always been known as the home of pandas, but in recent years it has stepped up its efforts to increase foreign investment and raise its competitiveness by enhancing IP protection. It has worked well. “Chengdu had the lowest investment risks as well as the best IP protection across the country,” according to the report China: Europe Should Seize the Opportunity to Invest in Chengdu from the European News Agency. “Chengdu is taking a leading role in IPR creation, management, protection and commercialisation. This advantageous environment makes Chengdu a prime choice for foreign investors and has attracted numerous foreigners to invest,” said Ding Xiaobin, deputy director general of the Chengdu Science & Technology Bureau.

Facts and figures In 2012, the city attracted $8.59 billion in foreign investment and Rmb3.19 billion in domestic investment. The total value of imports and exports in the same year reached $47.54 billion. Part of this foreign investment is coming from Fortune 500 companies. A total of 238 of the Fortune 500 companies have operations in Chengdu. Foreign companies there include IBM, Intel, Dell, Texas Instruments, Toyota and Volkswagen. “When Fortune 500 companies choose the investment location, the environment

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

for intellectual property right protections is always regarded as an important factor,” said Ding. According to Ding, in 2005, when Intel planned to invest in China, the microchip maker decided to settle in Chengdu because of the good environment for IP protection. GE also opened up an innovation centre in Chengdu last year. The centre is located in the Chengdu High-technology Industrial Development Zone (CDHT). The centre will focus on research and development and marketing, specifically in healthcare, shale gas

drilling technology, automation solutions and green energy. The State Intellectual Property Office (SIPO) announced in February last year that it would name 10 high-technology zones as IP demonstration parks. Beijing, Shanghai and some of China’s more affluent and coastal cities were included, but so too was Chengdu. The IP demonstration parks are part of SIPO’s efforts to work with local cities to formulate IP measures. From this, the parks offer enhanced IP protection and have become more sophisticated in managing IP issues.

新聞分析

知識產權和電信、傳媒及科技

Interview | 專訪

Managing one of the world’s largest patent portfolios | 管理世上數一數二的專利組合 Shen Jianfeng, Director of ZTE’s IP Department, spoke to David Tring about strategy, counterfeiting and how to effectively manage IP at R&D centres | 作為中國通訊產業的旗艦企業之一，中興通訊已逐漸建立起自己的知識產權的保護體系。我們的編輯David Tring 有幸採訪到了中興通訊知識產權部部長沈劍峰，就該公司知識產權保護戰略、打擊假冒產品以及如何在研發過程中管理知識產權等問題上交換了意見 What is the general structure of ZTE’s legal department? At ZTE, great importance has been placed on intellectual property rights (IPR) strategy. According to ZTE’s business demand, there are sections with different functions which make up the legal department. IPR managers in various sections are separately responsible for strategic planning, performance evaluation, risk management, licensing and operation, patent prosecution, intellectual property commercial competition, as well as litigation and negotiations. Each position has a clearly defined duty and generally each IPR manager is independently responsible for the work covered by their own scope. However, for significant matters or tasks that require cooperation, I choose to organise a virtual team with a leader to coordinate and manage human resources in order to complete these particular tasks. Thus, with a combination of centralised management and decentralised cooperation, an efficient and advanced IPR management system can be formed. How do you tackle counterfeiting? In recent years, counterfeiting has become rampant and has a very bad affect on ZTE’s product market. In recent years, we have found many cases of counterfeiting. These cases involved products like batteries, cell phones, data cards and others. Our cooperation with the Administration for Industry and Commerce and public security departments has meant ZTE’s IPR department has helped the company avoid enormous economic loss. What recent changes to IP legislation have affected your work? We attach great attention to the changes in IP legislation. Once I am aware of such changes, I will promptly organise a discussion within the department to assess the impact of these changes. Not long ago, SIPO made publicly available a draft of the proposed Service Invention Regulations (國家知

識產權局職務發明條例). The service invention system is a basic system for adjusting the ownership of the rights and profit distribution, which will also bring certain challenges to many enterprises in terms of compliance with reward and remuneration issues in China. I organised a special group to carry out general research on this draft and submitted our own comments to SIPO.

What are some of the IP issues involved with research and development? In China, a research and development project involves many IP issues. For example, early in the project, if the project team did not perform a novelty search carefully, they might risk infringing the patent rights of other businesses. If some companies used pirated software during a research and development project, they might face the risk of infringing copyright. Finally, when a product is shipped, if the research team used someone else’s trademark, they might risk infringing trademark rights. ZTE fully respects the intellectual property of others, we are committed to accelerating innovation through collaboration and support for intellectual

Our cooperation with the “Administration for Industry and Commerce and public security departments has meant ZTE’s IPR department has helped the company avoid enormous economic loss | ZTE 知識產權部通過協助工商、公安部門積極打假維權，為公司輓回了極大的損失

”

property rights. Over the years, the IPR department has been strengthening the IP protection awareness of the staff. To protect our own intellectual property rights, ZTE has set up an efficient and sophisticated IPR management system. We put intellectual property protection into the whole process of research and development execution. In the process, IPR managers should go into the R&D centre to collaborate closely with the research fellows on each project. Measures, such as designing-around and patent monitoring are in place to prevent potential risks. What is a typical workday like for you? Currently, I am responsible for developing and revising the intellectual property rights strategy, risk management, intellectual property operation, intellectual property assets reserve and intellectual property litigation management. Every weekday, I focus on these responsibilities. What are some IP trends you are witnessing? First, the patent wars between high-technology companies are increasing. I am acutely conscious of the increasing pressure of IP litigation, not only because the communications industry is technology intensive, but because Chinese communications enterprises are expanding rapidly all over the world. In the past ten years, ZTE has experienced explosive growth in patent applications. ZTE is now one of the leading patent holders among vendors in the telecommunications industry internationally, having filed applications for 48,000 patents globally. Our rapidly growing patent portfolio will help reduce the risks of IP litigation. The tremendous growth in ZTE’s patent applications has been important in dealing with foreign tycoons and patent trolls. We have cast off our passive attitude. Second, innovation of IP business models is particularly active. Intellectual property assets are among the most valuable assets at a company and it is increasingly important to leverage them for competitive advantage. IP business models are

中國法律商務2013年回顧

Intellectual Property & TMT

mature and systematic in developed countries. In the past two years, new patent operation centres have sprung up all over China. ZTE is actively participating in IP operations, which will in turn reduce R&D costs for innovators and increase the profits of our company. So far, we have tried many methods of patent management. We have adopted for example, patent auction, patent licensing, patent shares, internal licensing and patent pools building. How do you manage IP protection around the world? The IPR department has a very professional team. Expertise of law, communication technology and business are combined in the team. Every IPR manager has legal talent and is specialised in multiple academic fields. I have established a regular meeting system within the IPR department. Section members meet once a month to discuss and suggest solutions to work problems. At our regular meeting, everyone can express themselves freely. Together we can pool resources and find the best answers to the many IPR problems. As I have said before, an efficient and perfect IPR management system has been formed in ZTE. We put intellectual property protection into the whole process of research and development execution, market sales, logistics and purchasing. We have successfully implemented IP risks prevention and controlling in a comprehensive way and for this reason we can effectively prevent IP risks. I am also looking into the project operation of our IP protection. A project management system has been applied to IPR litigation and negotiations. Because of this system, most of the IPR litigation and negotiations problems have been solved in an appropriate manner. What qualities do you look for when working with external counsel? First, we usually hire different law firms according to different situations in different countries, and for grave and complex cases we will be very careful to designate a key law firm. Furthermore, we are looking for external counsel with the following qualities: • Rich experience in dealing with IPR cases and especially good at handling cases in the communications field; • Outstanding case management capacity and the ability to solve any unexpected issues; • Excellent communication skills with experience in Chinese, European and US cultures; • Experience in cost reduction and expense control. Reasonable prices for customers qualified to provide quality service. 可否介紹一下中興通訊法務部（知識產權部）的整體架構？在中興通訊，對知識產權戰略是高度重視的。法律部門中設有專職的IPR業務經

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

News analysis

理，IPR經理根據所在的不同科室，分別承擔部門業務規劃、考核、知識產權風險管控、知識產權許可運營、知識產權申請、知識產權業務競爭、訴訟談判等工作。每個IPR經理有明確的職責，獨立地負責各自科室職責範圍的知識產權工作。但對於較為重要的業務以及涉及多業務範圍的工作，通常我會組建虛擬團隊，指定負責人協調人力進行工作安排。這種集中管理與分散管理有機結合形成了一個完善、高效的知識產權管理體系。就反假冒而言，您會採取何種措施保護貴司的知識產權？近年來假冒行為日漸猖獗，給中興通訊產品市場帶來極大的負面影響。僅最近幾年就發生電池、手機、數據卡等假冒產品近20起。知識產權部通過協助工商、公安部門積極打假維權，為公司輓回了極大的損失。近期，有哪些知識產權法律規範的改變影響到了您的工作？我們對知識產權法律法規的改變一直保持關注，一旦發現有哪些法律法規發生了變化，我都會組織部門內部進行研討，分析、評估這些變化對於企業市場經營和競爭可能帶來何種影響。近期，我們團隊還專門就國家知識產權發佈的《職務發明條例(草案)(徵求意見稿)》進行了專門研討並向國家知識產權局提交了我們的意見。職務發明是關係到企業產品的產權和利潤分配的，對很多企業來說，就要因此調整合規條例、薪酬和體系。在中國，研發活動會涉及到哪些知識產權問題呢？一個研發項目，從立項到開始研發再到產品出貨會涉及到不少知識產權問題。例如，在立項前期，如果項目組沒有對相關技術點的專利進行認真檢索，那麼研發活動就有侵犯別人專利權的危險；而研發時如果有些公司使用了盜版軟件進行研發，那麼研發活動就有可能侵犯版權；最後，在產品發貨時，如果使用了別人的商標標識，就有可能侵犯商標權。當然，如果參與研發人員的知識知識產權意識不高，那麼該研發活動很有可能不會產出專利，難以保護研發成果。中興通訊歷來尊重知識產權,以開放和共享的姿態積極與業界夥伴交流。知識產權部一直致力於提高企業員工的知識產權意識。為了保護我們自己的知識產權成果不被他人侵犯，中興通訊建立了一套全流程的知識產權風險防控及知識產權佈局體系，在研發端通過知識產權風險排查、預警分析、回避設計等多項工作來應對潛在風險。在這一過程中，IPR經理必須深入到研發機構和研發項目中去的。您典型的一個工作日是怎樣安排的？目前我的主要職責為負責公司知識產權戰略的制定與修改、知識產權風險預防與控制、知識產權談判訴訟案件管理、知識產權資產儲備、知識產權運營等工作。每個工作日也大概由以上這些方面的內容構成。就目前而言，您覺得在知識產權領域中有哪些發展動向？目前知識產權領域的動態主要有一、高科技產業領域的專利訴訟白熱化。我們深刻地感受到中興通訊面臨的訴訟壓力在不斷增加。這不僅僅是因為通信行業技術密集度高，還在於中國的通訊企業已經成

為一股不可忽視的力量。當然，在倍感壓力的同時，隨著我所經歷過的訴訟及談判的不斷增加，我們在國際談判桌上的心態也發生了轉變。中興通訊進過十幾年的自主創新，專利總量即將突破五萬大關，在全球通訊產業當中的專利持有量領先。我們不斷壯大的專利組合對減少專利訴訟的發生是很有幫助的。這樣的知識產權實力支撐我們在面對海外通信巨頭和“專利流氓”時能夠從容不迫。我們已走出被動局面，掌握了訴訟及談判主動權。二、知識產權經營模式不斷創新。知識產權的資產是企業最重要的資產之一。企業除了可以運用知識產權為其生產經營活動保駕護航之外，還可以通過有效的運營將知識產權資產盤活為公司的利潤。在發達國家，知識產權運營是成熟的、系統化的運作。在中國，各類專利運營中心也如雨後春筍般不斷冒出。中興通訊在專利儲備上已經具備國際水準，也在積極嘗試專利運營。到目前為止，我們主要嘗試了專利拍賣、專利許可、專利入股、內部許可、專利池聯營等知識產權運營模式。中興訊通過規模化的專利運營模式，將專利資產貨幣化，為公司獲得了利潤。中興通訊是如何管控中國乃至世界範圍內的知識產權保護呢？首先，我們的知識產權部非常專業。中興通訊的專業知識產權團隊的成員既是通訊技術專家，又是法律專家，更是商業專家。懂技術，可以在通信行業立足；懂法律，可以運用法律維護公司利益；懂商業，可以為公司創造價值。在日常的團隊管理中，我們通過定期的部門例會、科室例會和相關團隊例會的形式，交流每位同事在工作中遇到的問題、收獲的經驗和未來的困難，並通過集思廣益，對知識產權保護進行不斷的優化和改進。其次，中興通訊知識產權部擁有業界最完善的知識產權風險防控體系，通過對公司研發、市場、物流等領域的全方位流程嵌入，我們已經成功地實現全IP風險防控嵌入，在產品各個環節能夠迅速發現風險並規避風險；此外，我們通過項目化運作的方式全面管理訴訟、談判案件，密切跟蹤並妥善解決談判訴訟風險。當您和外部律師合作時，您希望他們具備何種才能？答：首先我們通常會根據公司在不同國家的法律事務需要來選聘不同的律師事務所, 對複雜、重要的案件，我們會非常小心地選擇聲譽最好的律所。進一步的，在此基礎上我們具體對合作外部律師的要求是： 1、經驗豐富，尤其擅長通信領域知識產權訴訟案件； 2、有良好的管控能力，能夠妥善應對案件中各種突發情況； 3、對中西方文化有一定瞭解，善於通過有效溝通消除文化差異的影響； 4、有完善的費用控制方案，能幫助公司以合理成本解決法律爭端。

Intellectual Property & TMT

Role of IP in attracting foreign investment Chengdu has realised that by putting IP protection at the forefront of its policy agenda, the city can obtain a competitive edge when it comes to attracting foreign investment. “Competition from country to country, city to city and enterprise to enterprise is down to the competition of intellectual property rights. Intellectual property has become an important part of the core competiveness of cities,” said Ding. Foreign investors once acknowledged that one of the costs of doing business in China was at the expense of decreased IP protection. However, in recent years this has changed as foreign investors are not focusing on the cheap labour offered, but on innovation and research and development. By catering for these needs, Chengdu has become an attractive place for foreign investors who are more sophisticated and need strong IP protection to protect what they develop in China.

How Chengdu stands out The city has its own Regulations on protecting and promoting patents and more than 50 local regulations and policy papers are related to IP protection. The city has also issues famous trademark legislation, which can offer brands increased protection. “We have set up an IPR regime that meets the requirements of a socialist market economy and is in line with international practice,” said Ding. Chengdu has its own IP court and four local courts that can handle IP cases. In 2012, the city reviewed 2,142 civil and commercial cases, with 1,947 decided. Examples include a copyright infringement case involving Microsoft software, infringement of the Guizhou Maotai trademark and cases involving Louis Vuitton accessories. “We operate a zero tolerance policy towards IP infringement,” said Ding. The city has also set up an IP exchange with foreign investors, organising meetings to talk about IP on a regular basis. This allows investors to voice concerns and receive updates on the latest IP policies.

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

News analysis

When Fortune 500 companies choose the investment location, “the environment for intellectual property right protections is always regarded as an important factor | 許多世界 500 強企業在選擇投資地點時，始終將當地的知識產權保護水平看作一個重要因素

”

Ding Xiaobin, Deputy Director General of the Chengdu Science & Technology Bureau 丁小斌, 成都市科學技術局副局長

“We stress the contribution of IP in boosting economic development and enhancing the core competiveness and sustainability of the city,” said Ding. It is not yet clear whether Chengdu’s model can work for the rest of western China. But the Chengdu model shows that it is possible for a city outside of China’s more prosperous cities to consider the issues that are affecting foreign investors and use those concerns to enhance competitiveness. It is no secret that as costs rise in the coastal areas, investors have considered, but often been cautious about moving west. Chengdu is removing that hesitation and the model could transform the city and the region.

位

於中國中部，成都一直以來以熊貓之鄉而著名。不過近年來，成都正緊鑼密鼓地部署知識產權保護工作從而來實現提高外商投資來提升城市競爭力。事實證明效果不錯。根據某歐洲新聞機構的報道“中國：歐洲應該抓住機遇到成都投資”的說法， “在整個中國國內，在成都投資風險最低，同時還擁有最好的知識產權保護。” “成都在知識產權工作的開展、管理、保護和商業化方面一直處於領先水平。這一有利的環境使成都成為外國投資者的首選，吸引了大量外國人來到這裡投資，”成都市科學技術局副局長丁小斌說道。事實與數據 2012 年，成都市共吸引外商投資 85.9 億美元，吸引國內投資 31.9 億人民幣。同年的進出口總額達到了 475.4 億美元。在這些外商投資中，有一部分來自於

世界 500 強企業。世界 500 強企業中共有 238 家公司在成都設有分部。這些外國企業包括 IBM、英特爾、戴爾、德州儀器、豐田汽車以及大眾汽車。 “許多世界 500 強企業在選擇投資地點時，始終將當地的知識產權保護水平看作一個重要因素，”丁小斌說道。丁小斌介紹說，世界芯片製造商巨頭英特爾公司在 2005 年計劃來華投資，最終選擇成都就是因為這裡良好的知識產權保護環境。美國通用電氣公司去年也在成都開辦了一個創新中心。該中心坐落於成都高新技術產業開發區。該中心將主要從事研發和市場營銷方面的工作，尤其是在醫療保健、頁岩氣鑽井技術、自動化解決方案和綠色能源等領域。去年 2 月，中國國家知識產權局宣佈將從全國選出 10 個高新區作為知識產權示範園區。北京、上海及其他一些經濟較為發達的城市和沿海城市自然在內，但同時成都也榜上有名。知識產權示範園區是國家知識產權局與地方城市合作以規劃知識產權戰略的重要舉措之一。由此，這些園區將提供更加完備的知識產權保護和更為成熟的知識產權問題管理。知識產權在吸引外商投資方面的作用成都已經意識到，通過將知識產權保護放在政策議程的首要位置，可以幫助城市在吸引外商投資時獲得競爭優勢。 “無論是國家與國家間的競爭、城市與城市間的競爭還是企業與企業間的競爭，歸根結底都是知識產權的競爭。知識產權已經成為城市核心競爭力的重要組成部分，”丁小斌說道。曾經有外國投資者表示，在中國做生意的其中一項成本正是由知識產權保護

China Patent & Trademark Attorneys Since 1984 Practice Area  

Prosecution of patent and trademark applications Litigation relating to patent, trademark, copyright and other IP right disputes

 

Registration of domain names and layout designs of integrated circuits Customs recordal and protection of patents, trademarks and copyrights



Other services relating to intellectual property rights

With a strong team of over 250 experienced patent attorneys, trademark attorneys and attorneys-at-law, China Patent Agent (H.K.) Ltd. is always in a good position to provide excellent and quality service to our clients. Head Office 22/F, Great Eagle Center, 23 Harbor Road, Wanchai, Hong Kong Tel: (852) 2828 4688

Fax: (852) 2827 1018

E-mail: mail@cpahkltd.com

Website: www.cpahkltd.com

Beijing

New York

16/F., CCOIC Building, 2 Huapichang Hutong,

55 Broad Street, 15th Floor,

Xicheng District, Beijing 100035, China

New York, N.Y. 10004, U.S.A.

Tel : (86 10) 8220 2288

Tel: (1 212) 809 8100

Fax : (86 10) 6621 1564 (Patent)

Fax: (1 212) 809 8118

(86 10) 6621 1590 (Trademark) Shenzhen

Tokyo

12/F, Block One,China Phoenix Building,

Room 1003, Executive Tower Toranomon,

2008 Shennan Road, Futian District,

2-7-16 Toranomon Minato-ku,

Shenzhen 518026, China

Tokyo 105-0001, Japan

Tel: (86 755) 8275 5788

Tel: (81 3) 5251 1966

Fax: (86 755) 8368 8269

Fax: (81 3) 5251 1960

Shanghai

Munich

Suite 3301-03, Westgate Mall,

Frauenstr. 32,

1038 West Nanjing Road,

80469 Munich,

Shanghai 200041, China

Germany

Tel: (86 21)5256 9688

Tel: (49 89) 228 9328

Fax: (86 21) 6288 3922

Fax: (49 89) 228 9327

Intellectual Property & TMT

減少所帶來的損失。然而，近年來隨著外國投資者的重點關注方面逐漸從廉價勞動力轉移到創新和研發，這種情況也有所改觀。因為能夠滿足這些需求，成都吸引了越來越多的外國投資者，這些投資者非常懂得且知道需要當地完備的知識產權保護體系來保護其在中國開發的產品。成都如何脫穎而出成都有自己的關於專利保護和推廣的法規，還有超過 50 份的涉及知識產權保護的當地條例和政策文件。成都還頒布了著名商標法規，這可以為商標品牌帶來更多的保護。 “我們已經建立了一個可以滿足社會

News analysis

主義市場經濟要求並符合國際慣例的知識產權管理體制，”丁小斌說道。成都擁有自己的知識產權法院以及四個能夠處理知識產權案件的地方法院。 2012 年，成都共計審查了 2,142 起民事及商業案件，其中 1,947 起已有判決。這其中包括：涉及微軟軟件的版權侵權案、貴州茅台商標侵權案以及涉及路易·威登的案件。 “我們對知識產權侵權行為採取的是零容忍政策，”丁小斌說道。成都還與外商投資者建立了知識產權交流合作關係，定期組織會議討論有關知識產權的事項。這使得投資者能夠有機會說出他們關切的問題並知曉最新的知識產權政策。

SIPO sets out clear rules on service inventions | 國家知識產權局制定了有關職務發明的詳細規則 For the first time, draft Regulations on service inventions have given a clear procedural framework for defining and reporting inventions. Businesses in China need to make sure they have the right internal policies in place as penalties for non-compliance are harsh | 有關職務發明的法律草案第一次針對定義和報告發明制定了詳細的程序框架。由於法律對違規行為的懲罰相當嚴厲，中國的企業需要確保自己備有適當的內部政策

he State Intellectual Property Office (SIPO) issued the Service Invention Regulations (Draft) (國家知識產權局職務發明條例(草案)) for comments on November 12, with the consultation period ending on December 3. The Regulations are a response to the Plan for Medium- and Long-term Development of Quality Human Resources (關於印發國家中長期科技人才發展規劃（2010-2020 年）). The Plan set out clear guidelines for

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

developing talent, with patents as a primary resource for Chinese social and economical development. The current service invention system is basic and not practical. Article 16 of the PRC Patent Law (中華人民共和國專利法) simply states that companies must reward inventors for the service inventions, without detailing the procedures for defining an invention or how the reward should be agreed upon. There have also been several cases before

“我們十分強調知識產權在促進經濟發展以及增強城市核心競爭力和可持續性方面做出的貢獻，”丁小斌說道。成都的發展模式是否適合中國西部的其他城市還不得而知。但是，成都模式給予了我們這樣的啟發：中國的發展中城市或許可以考慮一些會影響外國投資者的問題，並利用這些關注點來加強自身的競爭力。由於沿海地區的各項成本增加，投資者對於遷至西部蠢蠢欲動但又小心翼翼，這已不是秘密。成都消除了投資者的顧慮，這種模式可以給城市和地區帶來翻天覆地的變化。

the courts where inventor’s rights have been infringed upon. For example, Sinopec had a case before the Shanghai Higher People’s Court in 2008, where the corporation claimed ownership of a service invention after the inventor’s employment contract terminated. “It does happen in China that some companies ignore and infringe upon inventors rights as they use the owner of the company as the inventor of the patent,” said Yao Di of King & Wood Mallesons in Shanghai.

Rewards When the entity and the inventor have not previously agreed upon the rewards for a service invention, Article 21 of the draft Regulations states that the reward must not be less than twice the monthly average salary of the entity’s employees. This differs from Article 77 of the Implementing Rules for the PRC Patent Law (中華人民共和國專利法實施細則), where the inventor must be rewarded no less than Rmb3000 ($480) for a service invention. The Regulations have the potential to greatly alter the reward amount. “It will depend on which authority issues the draft. If the State Council issues the Regulations then they will prevail. If government agencies like SIPO or the Ministry of Science and Technology jointly issue them, as they are lower than the State Council, the Imple-

新聞分析

知識產權和電信、傳媒及科技 INDIA

Leading IP & TMT lawyers Andy An, An Tian Zhang & Partners Spring Chang, Chang Tsi & Partners (see biography p.51) Linda Chang, Rouse David Chen Naiwei, AllBright Law Offices Xuemin Chen, Zhongzi Law Office George Q Fu, Watson & Band Karin Grauers, Vinge Singer John Huang, East IP Zhanying Jia, Liu Shen & Associates Jiang Zhipei, King & Wood Mallesons (see biography p.52) Horace Lam, Jones Day Li Lin, Hylands Law Firm Weng Li, Lusheng Law Firm Lian Yunze, Hyland51s Law Firm Geoffrey Lin, Ropes & Gray Bonan Lin, Zhongzi Law Office

The Regulations from SIPO give unprecedented rights to inventors

Jin Ling, Rouse Hao Ma, CCPIT Patent and Trademark Law Office Michelle Ma, Liu Shen & Associates Elliot Papageorgiou, Rouse

menting Rules will continue to govern,” said Huang Haifeng, an IP partner at Jones Day in Hong Kong.

Key Articles Article 9 states that if the company and the inventor have already signed an agreement, the requirements of the Regulations do not apply. This means that contracts will prevail over the regulations. The American Bar Association (ABA) has submitted comments to SIPO requesting that Article 9 should be clarified so that the agreement between the entity and inventor on the right regarding the invention may set forth full award and remuneration terms that supersede provisions that are applicable in the absence of an agreement. “A lot of companies have submitted their comments to SIPO. One of their concerns is that Article 9 of the Regulations must be in the final draft to ensure the Regulations shall not prevail over contractual arrangements between the entity and the inventor,” said Yao. Any agreement that eliminates or limits the rights of an inventor is also in the draft (Article 19). Eliminating rights is easy to define, but without further clarification it is hard to infer what will be considered as limiting the rights.

“This could be an issue with many chambers of commerce and concerned parties as many of these agreements contain default rules. This Article can be risky as to what extent or in what sense agreements are viewed as limiting,” noted Huang. When a company stops applying for IP rights to protect a service invention, the inventor can negotiate to obtain the rights for free or for a fee (Article 16). Yao warns that the notification as well as assignment of IP rights will be a heavy burden and increase the company’s cost.

Empowering local IP offices The Regulations give a surprising amount of power to local IP offices, as they now can inspect labour contracts, company policies and investigate any issues relating to non-compliance. There is also a fine of Rmb50,000 or under for entities that infringe two or more people’s inventions (Article 38). “This can raise some issues as disputes between employers and employees should be private and a penalty should not be imposed on this. Any issues the parties have they can file a law suit,” said Huang. Disagreements over ownership or compensation can also be mediated before local IP offices. This has been a common practice

Sharon Qiao, Rouse Jay Sha, Liu Shen & Associates Christopher Shaowei, NTD Patent & Trademark Agency David Tian, An Tian Zhang & Partners Xiaohua Wang, NTD Patent & Trademark Agency Chixue Wei, Linda Liu & Partners Li Yong, CCPIT Patent and Trademark Law Office Jianyang Yu, Liu Shen & Associates Gary Zhang, China Sinda

Source: Asialaw Leading Lawyers 2013

for patent infringement cases, but this is the first time they will deal with such contractual issues. It is not clear whether these local IP offices have the necessary expertise to handle contract interpretation and company policies. It will be interesting to see how the offices tackle this new role and if entities and inventors choose mediation over the courts.

Check internal policies Companies should go back and look at their contracts and make sure they are specific. If there are any ambiguities, it could mean they are subject to the default rules in the Regulations. They may also want to ensure their contracts comply with mandatory rules. “The specific procedure means inventors

中國法律商務2013年回顧

Intellectual Property & TMT

have the right to be informed. This means more tasks for IP in-house counsel as they will have to issue documents over the status of the service invention. They should work closely with the R&D department and the business to make sure they communicate and follow obligations,” said Huang. SIPO is expected to submit the Regulations before the State Council. If promulgated, companies will have to change their internal policies over agreements with inventors and make sure they comply with the Regulations. The penalties laid out in the draft show SIPO’s commitment to encouraging inventions by protecting inventor’s rights.

012年11月12 日，國家知識產權局發佈國家知識產權局職務發明條例（草案）徵求意見，咨詢期截止到 12 月 3 日。

該條例是對國家中長期科技人才發展規劃（2010－2020 年）的回應。該規劃列出了人才培育的明確准則，並指出專利是中國社會和經濟發展的主要資源。目前的職務發明體系較為基礎，且不實用。《中華人民共和國專利法》第 16 條簡要說明瞭公司必須對職務發明的發明人給予一定的獎勵，但並沒有詳細說明定義發明的程序或者應如何確定獎勵的形式和金額。之前也曾出現過幾起因發明人的權利遭到侵犯而向法院提起訴訟的案例。例如，在 2008 年上海高級人民法院審理的一起案件中，中國石化公司在發明人的雇傭合同到期後宣稱對該發明人的職務發明擁有所有權。 “在中國，一些公司忽視和侵犯發明人權利的現象確實存在，這是因為他們將公司的所有者等同於專利的發明人，”金杜律師事務所上海辦事處的姚迪說道。獎勵如果企業與發明人先前未就職務發明的獎勵達成一致，則根據職務發明條例草案第 21 條的說明，獎勵金額不得少於企業僱員月平均工資的兩倍。另一不同規定是，《中華人民共和國專利法實施細則》第 77 條規定發明人獲得的職務發明獎勵不得少於人民幣 3000 元（480 美元）。該條例有可能要大幅修改獎勵金額。

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

News analysis

“這取決於頒布職務發明草案的權力機構。如果該條例是由國務院頒發，則以該條例為準。如果該條例是由政府機關（如國家知識產權局或科技部）聯合頒發，由於他們的政治級別低於國務院，因此仍然以“專利法實施細則”為準，”眾達律師事務所香港辦事處的知識產權合伙人黃海峰說道。重要條款職務發明草案的第 9 條規定：如果公司與發明人已簽署協定，則該條例就不再適用。這就說明合同的優先級高於條例規定。美國律師協會 (ABA) 已向國家知識產權局提交意見，要求對草案第 9 條規定加以詳細闡明，使企業與發明人之間訂立的有關發明權利的協議能夠規定完整的獎勵和酬勞條款，從而取代在未達成協議的情況下適用的條款。 “許多企業都已向國家知識產權局提交了意見。他們較為關心的問題之一就是，希望最終草案中必須包含該第 9 條，以確保該條例的優先級不得高於企業與發明人之間訂立的合同協議，”姚迪說道。關於剝奪或限制發明人權利的協議也寫在了職務發明草案（第 19 條）中。剝奪權利很容易界定，但是如果沒有進一步的詳細闡述，限制權利將很難推斷。 “這對於許多商會和有關各方來說可能是個問題，因為商會中企業的合同中含很多默認內容。第19條沒有定義清楚，怎樣程度的‘限制’可以視為‘限制發明人權利’。”黃海峰談道。如果公司停止申請保護職務發明的知識產權，則發明人可進行協商以有償或無償獲得相應權利（第 16 條）。姚迪提醒道，知識產權的通告和轉讓對企業而言是個不小的負擔，並會增加企業開支。給各地知識產權局更多權力該條例授予了當地知識產權局非常大的權力，目前他們可以審查勞動合同、公司規定以及調查任何有關違規的問題。侵犯兩個或更多發明人權利的企業也將被處以最高 50,000 元人民幣的罰款（第 38 條）。 “這會引起許多問題，因為雇主和僱員之間的爭議屬於私人事務，不應在此之上強加任何處罰。相關各方有任何問題都可以提起法律訴訟，”黃海峰說道。

It does happen “in China that some companies ignore and infringe upon inventors rights as they use the owner of the company as the inventor of the patent | 在中國，一些公司忽視和侵犯發明人權利的現象確實存在，這是因為他們將公司的所有者等同於專利的發明人

”

Yao Di, King & Wood Mallesons, Shanghai 姚迪,金杜律師事務所, 上海

對所有權或報酬有分歧的問題也可以通過當地知識產權局進行調解。在專利侵權案件中，這是很常見的做法，但用於此類合同問題尚屬首次。這些當地知識產權局是否具有處理合同解釋和公司政策的必要專業知識還不得而知。這些地方政府將如何應對這一新角色，以及企業與發明人是否會選擇庭外和解，讓我們拭目以待。檢查內部政策企業應該回去仔細檢查他們的合同，確保合同條款規定明確。如果有任何模棱兩可的地方，就意味著這些合同應服從法律中的默認規則。企業還需確定他們的合同遵守強制性規則。 “明確的規定意味著發明人擁有知曉權。這意味著公司內部的知識產權法律顧問需要完成更多的任務，因為他們不得不針對職務發明的發展狀況發佈時時更新。他們應該與研發部門及企業緊密合作，以確保他們傳達和遵守義務，”黃海峰說道。國家知識產權局將把本草案上交國務院審批。如果本條例最終通過，則企業必須修訂其內部政策中有關與發明人間協議的規定。其中的處罰措施體現了國家知識產權局通過保護髮明人權利來鼓勵發明創造的承諾。

新聞分析

Spring Chang

知識產權和電信、傳媒及科技 INDIA

Frank Liu Chang Tsi & Partners 7-8th Floor Tower A, Hundred Island Park, Bei Zhan Bei Jie Street, Xicheng District, Beijing, China 100044 Tel: (86-10) 8836 9999 Fax: (86-10) 8836 9996 Email: spring@changtsi.com Website: www.changtsi.com

Chang Tsi & Partners 7-8th Floor Tower A, Hundred Island Park, Bei Zhan Bei Jie Street, Xicheng District, Beijing, China 100044 Tel: (86-10) 8836 9999 Fax: (86-10) 8836 9996 Email: frankliu@changtsi.com Website: www.changtsi.com

Spring Chang is a founder and partner at Chang Tsi & Partners. Ms Chang focuses on all aspects of intellectual property rights, including applications and protection of trademarks, patents, copyrights, and domain names.

Frank Liu is a partner and head of the dispute resolution practice at the Beijing office of Chang Tsi & Partners. Mr Liu specialises in intellectual property, dispute resolution and general corporate law.

Professional Experience Ms Chang has earned an international reputation for creativity and efficiency during more than two decades of work as an attorney assisting clients from around the world in China, as well as Chinese clients abroad. Ms Chang is skilled in developing and implementing comprehensive and effective intellectual property strategies. She has handled significant civil, administrative and criminal lawsuits and is routinely sought for her expertise in managing challenging investigations and administrative enforcement matters. Clients include major electronics, consumer products, pharmaceutical, apparel, and jewelry companies.

Professional Experience Mr Liu is skilled in successfully handling challenging litigation matters of all types. He has handled over a hundred civil lawsuits and is regularly praised for his “excellent trial skills.” Prior to entering private practice, Mr Liu spent five years working as an intermediate court judge in Gansu, China. Mr Liu is entrusted by many leading Chinese and international corporations to provide advice and counsel on their trademark, domain name, copyright, unfair competition and licensing matters. Although significant compensation for intellectual property infringement is challenging to obtain in China, Mr Liu has helped secure over US$1 Million compensation in both trademark and patent infringement cases. Mr Liu also has a strong reputation for arbitration and negotiation work. He regularly advises financial institutions and corporate clients on challenging contract disputes and their daily business operations.

Her successful representation of Air China was recognised as one of the “Ten Most Influential Trademark Events of 2009-2010” at the 2011 China Annual Trademark Meeting, and her 2011 victory for Best Buy before the Supreme People’s Court allowed for registration of its house mark in China. Ms Chang is highly skilled in administrative reviews of official refusals and reviews of opposition proceedings before the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board. She also has a strong record in administrative litigation, with significant victories before the Beijing High Court for an outdoor clothing manufacturer in 2012 and a leading zipper company in 2013. Before founding Chang Tsi & Partners in 2002, Ms Chang was a visiting attorney at a major law firm in the US, a trademark attorney for the China Council for the Promotion of International Trade, and counsel at the General Office of the State Planning Committee in Beijing. Awards Ms Chang is regularly ranked in the top tier of IP attorneys in China. For years, she has been rated as a Top International Trademark Attorney in China by Who’s Who Legal. Ms Chang is also listed in the Leading Trademark Law Practitioners Guide by Managing Intellectual Property magazine, and ranked as a leading trademark specialist by Chambers & Partners. Additionally, she was listed as one of the most highly acclaimed intellectual property experts in the Asia Pacific region by Asia Law & Practice in 2011. Publications and Speeches • Sophisticated counterfeiters and stronger enforcement, China Law and Practice, August 2013 • Establishing Reputation and Fame Evidence in China, World Trademark Review, November 2012 • Marques Annual Conference, September 2012, Workshop Speaker on Real-life Challenges of Well Known Brands Education LLM, China University of Political Science and Law LLB, Liaoning University

During his distinguished career, Mr Liu has won a number of high profile cases. He represented a beverage company in bottle design utility model infringement litigation that successfully settled when the defendants agreed to provide around US$1.5 million in compensation. He helped secure well-known recognition for Lenovo in administrative litigation against the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board (TRAB) while successfully opposing a trademark application filed by a manufacturer of eye glasses. Mr Liu acted as local counsel for JA Apparel to successfully secure a judgment by a Chinese Court to confirm and enforce a US$1.7 million arbitration award. In an unfair competition case, he represented Best Buy against a Chinese company that used Best Buy’s Chinese trademark as part of its trade name. The successful favourable judgment in the Best Buy case requiring the Chinese company to change its company name and to compensate for the client’s loss was listed as a top 10 typical case of Xiamen Intermediate People’s Court in 2011. Representative commercial litigation handed by Mr Liu includes insurance, securities, debt actions, employment disputes, and land and construction matters. Mr Liu also advises clients on Foreign Direct Investment and relevant dispute resolution, mergers & acquisitions, pre-IPO restructuring, reorganisation, and risk assessment, management and prevention. Education LLB, Lanzhou University, School of Law LLM, Lanzhou University, School of Law Completed graduate legal studies at University of London Professional Associations All China Lawyers Association (ACLA), International Trademark Association (INTA), China Britain Law Institute (CBLI)

Professional Associations Intellectual Property Committee of the Beijing Lawyers Association, Member of the MARQUES Famous and Well Known Marks Team, INTA and AIPPI.

中國法律商務2013年回顧

Intellectual Property & TMT

News analysis

Jiang Zhipei King & Wood Mallesons 40th Floor, Tower A, Beijing Fortune Plaza 7 Dongsanhuan Zhonglu, Chaoyang District Beijing, 100020, P R China Tel: (86-10) 5878 5057 Fax: (86-10) 5878 5522 Email: jiangzhipei@cn.kwm.com Website: www.kwm.com Jiang Zhipei specialises in intellectual property litigation. Mr Jiang tried many landmark intellectual property cases during his years serving as a judge and gained extensive judicial experience in the area of intellectual property law. He participated in the drafting and amendment of Chinese civil law, intellectual property laws, and civil procedure law, as well as the drafting of many judicial interpretations on civil and commercial laws. He published numerous works and papers as editor-in-chief, author or co-author, including Intellectual Property Action, Network and Electronics Commercial Law, China’s Legal Protection of Intellectual Property After WTO Entry, Guidance and Reference of Intellectual Property (Volumes 1-8), Intellectual Property Cases of the Supreme People’s Court and Their Analysis, Law Application and Juridical Interpretation of Intellectual Property, Explication to the NewlyAdapted Patent Law, Evidence in Intellectual Property Civil Trial Practice, Practice on Intellectual Property Law Application, Judicial Practice on New Knotty Patent and Trademark Cases, Judicial Protection of China Intellectual Property (2007), and Judicial Protection of China Intellectual Property (2008). In 1999, Mr Jiang founded the website of IPR Judicial Protection in China (www.chinaiprlaw.cn). Mr Jiang represented the Supreme People’s Court as a speaker and attendee at numerous domestic and international intellectual property forums and conferences over the years. Mr Jiang was recognised as one of the “50 Most Influential People in the area of Intellectual Property Protection Globally” by Managing Intellectual Property (MIP) in 2004 and 2005. He also received the award as the Brilliant Contribution People in China IP Protection in 2009, and the Brilliant Contribution People in Development of China IP and Quality Supervision (2000-2010). In 2011, Mr Jiang received the Life Time Achievement Award in the area of Intellectual Property Protection from MIP. Work Experience Prior to joining King & Wood Mallesons in August 2011, Mr Jiang was a senior consultant at a well known domestic law firm. Mr Jiang also served as First Class of Senior Judge of People’s Republic of China; Member of Judicial Committee of the Supreme People’s Court; Presiding Judge of Third Civil Division (Intellectual Property Division) of the Supreme People’s Court; Chief Justice of the Civil Division’s Foreign-Related Panel (Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan included) of the Supreme People’s Court; Presiding Judge of Civil Division, Vice President, Member of Judicial Committee of Beijing West District People’s Court. Mr Jiang received his LLM and PhD from the School of Law, China People’s University. He is proficient in Chinese and English.

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

觀察

知識產權和電信、傳媒及科技

The importance of IP strategy Chen Jihong of Zhong Lun Law Firm analyses the biggest cases of the last 12 months and looks at the proposed amendments to the Trademark Law 1. What were the key legislative and market developments affecting IP over the past year? How have these affected your work? The State Council revised two sets of regulations relating to copyrights, namely, the Implementing Regulations for the PRC Copyright Law and the Regulations for Protection of the Right of Communication Through Information Networks. Both sets of regulations came into effect on March 1. The newly revised versions of the regulations have imposed more severe punishment on infringement of copyright, especially online infringement. Recently, with the rapid development of China’s information technology industry, there have been an increasing number of cases involving the protection of intellectual property on the internet. For example, the conflict between trademark and domain name holders, weak protection on works distributed online and unfair competition involving complex network technology. As there are technical facts involved in cyber infringement cases, an understanding of advanced and complex technology is crucial in solving IP disputes relating to the internet. It is important to use litigators who have both law degrees and an understanding of advanced technology, as an understanding of the technical issues enables litigators to provide smarter and more effective representation. It is also vital to explore the full range of strategies before embarking on litigation, giving particular consideration to alternative dispute resolution methods such as arbitration and mediation.

2. What are some of the biggest challenges foreign companies experience when it comes to IP enforcement? IP law gives a company or an individual the right to own IP and protect it from infringement and misuse. Enforcement of IP is fundamental to IP protection; it gives reality and meaning to IP laws. But foreign companies in China face some serious challenges in IP enforcement. Foreign companies are far more critical of IP enforcement than they are of legislation. Although the central government has taken various measures to strengthen enforcement, some factors including local interest protectionism, insufficiency of qualified IP officials and judges and imbalance of economic development still reduce the effectiveness of enforcement efforts. In addition, foreign companies need to realise one fact – the enforce-

There have been an increasing number of cases involving the protection of intellectual property on the internet

中國法律商務2013年回顧

Intellectual Property & TMT

Insights

ment of IP law in different areas is very different. In commercial, central cities like Beijing and Shanghai, judges are very experienced and capable of hearing very complicated IP cases, and local interest protectionism is minimal, while on the contrary, in other areas the courts may lack experience in hearing IP cases. The venue for your IP case is also critical. Fortunately, the legal system of China allows for a limited amount of what is called venue shopping. In terms of trademark cross-border protection, due to the principle of territoriality of a trademark, Chinese courts sometimes require a trademark to be well-known in China and deny protection even if a foreign company, the true owner of the trademark, can prove that the mark is internationally well-known in a considerable number of other countries. Many technology transfer/licensing agreements are entered into by and between the foreign licensor and the Chinese licensee. In the context of dispute resolution, this may raise a difficulty for international enforcement. A court judgment obtained in the jurisdiction of the foreign licensor may be difficult to enforce in China, due to the complexity of procedure or absence of an international treaty that is mutually recognised. This problem can be overcome by initiating proceedings in China, but foreign companies are reluctant to do so, possibly because they are less familiar with the law, legal culture, courts and languages of China.

3. How important is IP strategy? To what extent do you help provide an IP strategy for your clients? Intellectual property has become widely perceived as an important economic asset, the value of which can be enhanced by a proactive strategy. Intellectual property in the forms of patents, trademarks, copyrighted works, industrial designs, trade secrets, geographical indications, like other types of property, can be developed, owned, managed and commercialised to generate an economic return. Both the government and companies are realising the importance of an IP strategy for enterprises. SIPO, the Standardisation Administration and AQSIQ jointly issued the first Guidelines on Enterprise Intellectual Property Management (企業知識產權管理規範) in form of national standards, which came into force on March 1 2013. These Guidelines will set up guidance for Chinese enterprises to design IP strategy and IP management rules. To help businesses do this, we have established a unique IP Strategy Evaluation System that helps companies to efficiently develop and IP strategy and IP management system.

4. What were some of the biggest and most legally challenging IP cases you were involved with this year? We have successfully handled a large number of patent, trademark, copyright, trade secret and unfair competition cases – some of them setting Chinese legal precedents. In the last year, we defended our client MSN in a series of online copyright cases, which are related to copyright infringement of movies on the internet and are controversial due to the new technologies

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

involved and we represented Bayer in an internet defamation case. E-commerce is becoming the import business method for telecom carriers and we advised China Telecom on its e-commerce procedure, contract, and policies. This advice was designed to avoid any legal dispute and ensure the validity and effectiveness of the e-contract.

5. What is your outlook for IP legislation over the next 12 months? What legislation is likely to come out or be issued and how will this affect the market? The revised Trademark Law is expected to come out in the near future. The revised version of the Trademark Law attempts to address the practical issues in relation to trademark application, trademark administration, protection and enforcement. The trademark law contains three key improvements. First, the procedure for trademark application is facilitated. Secondly, registration in bad faith or free riding is strictly prohibited. Thirdly, more severe punishment is adopted to crack down on trademark infringement. In my opinion, the new Trademark Law is conducive to protecting trademark rights and is more effective in stopping trademark counterfeiting.

6. How can companies effectively deal with trademark squatting? When combating trademark squatting, confusion is a consideration of enforcement officials. The core of China’s Trademark Laws aims to protect against the likelihood of confusion among the relevant sector of the public as to the origin of a product, or as to a certain relationship (for example, an affiliation, connection, association, sponsorship, approval or licence) between different businesses or entities. Establishing confusion is the first step for the company.

Author biography Chen Jihong Chen Jihong is a partner of Zhong Lun Law Firm. His practice includes IP enforcement and dispute resolution, IP licensing, IP portfolio management, IP due diligence, patent/trademark prosecution, IT/High-tech related legal matters, domain name dispute resolution and TMT matters. Chen Jihong is now the co-Chair and Secretary General of IT/High-Tech Committee of the All China Lawyers Association, Chairman of the Telecoms Law Committee under Beijing Lawyers Association and IPR Expert to China’s National IPR Strategy Office. Chen has published dozens of professional IP articles and books in Chinese and international journals and newspapers. He is an active IP practitioner and has regularly given lectures in international conferences. In 2005, he was nominated one of the 10 Best IP/IT Practitioners in China by China Daily newspaper and China e-Commerce Association. In 2011, he was selected as one of the 50 Best Chinese Lawyers by Corporate INTL Magazine. In 2012, Chen was elected one of the National IP Specialists by SIPO, which included only six lawyers nationwide. In 2013, Chen was elected one of the Ten Best IP Lawyers by Beijing Lawyers Association.

觀察

Enforcement of IP is fundamental to IP protection And, if one company can prove it enjoys prior civil rights including copyright or trade name over the trademark, it shall have an advantage when it attempts to recapture the trademark.

7. If you could offer one piece of practical advice to foreign clients about IP in China – what would it be? The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), launched its New gTLD (generic top level domain) programme on January 12 2012 to enable organisations and individuals to apply to operate their own top level domain name, i.e. the part of an internet address that comes after the dot – for example .com. The response has been enormous, with 1,194 applicants from 60 countries and regions having filed 1,930 applications in various string languages, including

知識產權和電信、傳媒及科技

English and Chinese. ICANN is expected to issue approval of the first batch of the new gTLDs in August 2013, and fierce competition is likely to arise for the right to register second-level domain names. In anticipation of problems related to cybersquatting and conflicts between or among parties interested in registering the same name as a second-level domain, ICANN has developed a set of rights protection mechanisms (RPMs) for the new gTLDs, including the Trademark Clearinghouse, or TMCH, which enables trademark owners to register their marks and thus qualify for two related RPMs: a so-called “sunrise” registration period and issuance of Trademark Claims notices. During the sunrise period, which is at least the 30-day period before the relevant gTLD is opened to the public, a trademark owner may register a domain name that matches its mark. In addition, if a third party applies to register a domain name that matches the registered mark at least during the 90-day period after the relevant gTLD is opened to the public, ICANN will forward Trademark Claims notices to trademark owners that have registered their marks with the TMCH. Companies should consider these protection mechanisms during this era of information technology.

中國法律商務2013年回顧

Intellectual Property & TMT

Insights

知識產權戰略的重要性中倫律師事務所的陳際紅律師分析過去12個月的重大案件，並探討《商標法》的修訂草案 1. 過去1年，知識產權方面有什麼主要的法規出台或最新動態？對您的工作有什麼影響？國務院修訂了兩部有關著作權的法規：即3月1日實施的《著作權法實施條例》和《信息網絡傳播權保護條例》。修訂後的法規對侵犯著作權的行為，特別是網絡侵權，施以更嚴厲的處罰。近期，隨着中國信息技術的迅速發展，涉及網絡知識產權保護的案件有上升趨勢，例如，商標權人及域名持有人之間的爭議，信息網絡傳播的作品保護力度不足，以及涉及高新技術和網絡技術的不正當競爭等。由於網絡侵權案件涉及技術知識，瞭解先進、複雜的技術知識對解決有關互聯網的知識產權爭議相當關鍵。委任兼具法律學位及先進技術知識背景的律師來代理訴訟是至關重要的，因為只有理解技術性的問題，才能更有智慧和更有效地為客戶代理訴訟。在提起訴訟前，亦需考慮所有的可行的爭議解決方案，尤其是仲裁及調解等替代性解決爭議方法。 2．外國公司在知識產權執法方面遇到哪些最大的挑戰？知識產權法賦予一家公司或個人擁有專有的權利，保護其免受侵權或被濫用。知識產權執法是知識產權保護的基石，賦予知識產權法以實際意義，但在中國的外資公司在知識產權執法方面遇到一些重大的挑戰。相比知識產權立法，外國公司對知識產權執法的批評遠為嚴厲。儘管中央政府已採取一系列措施加強執法力度，但地區保護主義、行政官員及法官缺乏知識產權的相關經驗、經濟發展程度不均衡等因素還是降低了執法的效力。另外，外資公司需要瞭解的是知識產權在不同地區的執法存在很大差異。在北京、上海等商業化程度高的中心城市，法官具備豐富的經驗，有審理非常複雜的知識產權案件的能力，而且地區保護主義也最少。相反，其他地區的法院可能缺乏審理知識產權案件的經驗。因此，選擇合適的管轄地法院也很重要，幸好中國的司法制度允許在一定程度上選擇案件的管轄地法院。至於跨境商標保護，基於商標權地域性原則，中國法院會要求系爭商標在中國法域內馳名，即使在外國公司（即商標的真正持有人）能證明系爭商標在大多數其他國家為國際馳名的情況下，仍拒絕為商標給予保護。很多技術轉移/許可協議由外國許可人與中國被許可人簽訂，在爭議解決時，可能引起國內外跨境執行判決的困難。由於複雜的程序或缺乏相互承認的國際

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

涉及網絡知識產權保護的案件有上升趨勢

觀察

作者簡歷陳際紅陳際紅為中倫律師事務所的合伙人，業務範圍包括知識產權執行及爭議解決、知識產權許可、知識產權組合管理、知識產權盡職調查、專利及商標註冊、信息技術及高新技術相關法律事宜、域名爭議解決及電信、媒體與科技事宜。陳際紅現時為全國律師協會信息網絡與高新技術委員會副主任及秘書長、北京市律師協會電信法委員會主任及國家知識產權戰略辦公室知識產權戰略專家。陳曾為中外報章雜誌撰寫多篇專業知識產權文章及書籍，為活躍於知識產權行業的法律人員，並定期於國際會議中演講。 2005年，他被《中國日報》及中國電子商務協會評為“2005信息網絡法務人年度十佳”。2011年，他獲《Corporate INTL》雜誌選為50名最佳中國律師之一。2012 年，他被國家知識產權局選為六名國家知識產權專家其中之一。2013年，陳被北京市律師協會選為十佳知識產權律師。

條約，在外國許可人的司法管轄區取得的法院判決要在中國執行可能面臨一定困難。要解決這問題，可向中國法院申請執行判決，但外國公司或因對中國的法律、法律文化、法院及語言不熟悉，通常不願意提起訴訟。 3. 知識產權戰略有何重要性？您如何協助客戶擬定知識產權戰略？知識產權已被廣泛視為一項重要經濟資產，並且其價值可以通過前瞻性的策略加以提升。與其他類型的產權相似，專利權、商標、著作權作品、外觀設計、商業秘密、地理標誌等知識產權可以被創設、持有、管理、商業化，以取得經濟利益。政府及企業均認識到知識產權戰略對企業的重要性。國家知識產權局、國家標準化管理委員會及國家質檢總局，共同印發首項《企業知識產權管理規範》，並成為國家標準，於 2013年3月1日實施。《規範》為中國企業提供有關策劃知識產權戰略及知識產權管理規則的指引。為協助公司處理這方面的事宜，我們設立了一個獨特的知識產權戰略評估體系，協助企業有效地制定知識產權戰略及知識產權管理制度。 4. 可否介紹一下您今年曾處理過的最重大及最具挑戰性的知識產權案件？我們成功處理了大量專利權、著作權、商業秘密及不正當競爭案件，其中一些案件甚至成為中國具有突破性的判例。去年，我們代表客戶MSN在一系列網絡著作權案件中擔任代理人，案件是關於互聯網上的電影作品的著作權侵權，由於涉及新技術，引起了廣泛的關注和討論。我們亦於一起互

知識產權和電信、傳媒及科技

知識產權執法是知識產權保護的基石聯網商業詆毀案件中代表拜耳公司。電子商務逐漸成為電信運營商的重要業務模式，我們為中國電信，就有關其電子商務程序、合同及政策提供咨詢，以避免法律糾紛，以及確保電子合同的有效性及效力。 5. 您認為知識產權法規在未來12個月將有什麼發展？您預計有什麼法規出台，對市場有何影響？修訂後的商標法預計將於近期出台。修訂版本針對商標申請、管理、保護及執法等實務問題進行了三個方面的完善：第一、加快商標申請程序；第二，嚴格禁止惡意註冊或“搭便車”；第三，加重處罰力度以打擊商標侵權。我認為新商標法有利保護商標權利，並更有效阻止商標仿冒。 6. 企業如何能有效處理商標搶註問題？處理商標搶注問題時，法官或審查員會考慮商標所引起的混淆。中國商標法的重點在於避免相關公眾產生混淆的可能性，包括對產品來源的混淆或者特定關係（例如，關聯公司、合作、聯合、贊助、批准或許可關係）的混淆。公司首先需證明被搶注的商標引起了混淆。另外，如果公司能證明其對系爭商標享有著作權或商號權等在先民事權利的，將有利於其奪回商標。 7. 如果您要為外國客戶提供一項有關知識產權的具體建議，那會是怎樣的建議？互聯網名稱與數字地址分配機構（ICANN）於2012年1月12日推出通用頂級域名（gTLD）計劃，機構與個人可申請其頂級域名，即互聯網地址圓點之後的部分，例如.com。計劃推出後反響熱烈，共有來自60個國家地區的1,194個申請人以中英文等各種字符串語言提交了1,930份申請書。預計ICANN將於 2013年8月批准第一批新通用頂級域名。相信二級域名註冊權的競爭將會相當激烈。為應對域名搶注及有關當事人擬申請註冊同一域名可能引起的爭議，ICANN為新通用頂級域名制定了一系列權益保護機制，包括商標信息交換機構（TMCH），有利於商標持有人註冊域名，並享有兩項相關權益保護機制的保護：“日出”註冊期及商標權利聲明。“日出”註冊期間，即通用頂級域名向公眾開放前至少30日，商標持有人可申請註冊與其商標相符的域名。另外，第三方於通用頂級域名向公眾開放後90日內申請註冊與註冊商標相符的域名的，ICANN會將商標權利聲明轉發給已向商標信息交換機構申請註冊域名的商標持有人。在當今的信息科技時代，公司應考慮這些保護機制。

中國法律商務2013年回顧

Labour & Employment

News analysis

SPC strikes balance over employment contracts | 最高人民法院盡力維護勞動合同中的利益平衡 An Opinion from the Supreme People’s Court over employment contracts has given welcome guidance on non-compete compensation amounts and deals with some of the most common labour dispute problems | 最高人民法院給出有關勞動合同的意見，在競業禁止補償金額問題上給出了令人滿意的指導意見，另有內容可以解決一些常見的勞動爭議問題

he Court issued the Interpretation on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Law in the Trial of Labour Disputes (4) (最高人民法院關於審理勞動爭議案件適用法律若干問題的解釋（四）), the fourth Interpretation over employment contracts, on January 31. It became effective on February 1. “The Interpretation is a step forward – though it is slow, the previous three were mainly procedural, but this one covers more substantial issues like non-compete and verbal

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

changes to contracts,” said May Lu of MWE China Law Offices in Shanghai.

Balancing interests The SPC routinely issues judicial interpretations after reviewing cases from lower courts and asking for clarification on certain issues. They are designed to provide a framework for these courts to follow once issued. When the draft version of the Interpretation came out in August last year it caused

much controversy as it proposed non-compete compensation of 100% of the average previous 12 months’ salary. This meant employers would face unreasonable amounts of compensation and a lot of non-compete cases will come to the courts. The draft also required employers to follow consultation procedures to ensure company policies are binding before the courts and restricted the employer’s right to terminate the non-compete obligation during the noncompete period.

新聞分析

“The draft was more pro-union or proemployee, but the final version has become more balanced,” said Gordon Feng, a labour and employment lawyer with Paul Hastings in Shanghai. “All these changes indicate that the Interpretation tends to balance the interests of the parties by lightening the employer’s obligations in all these situations, in particular, non-compete clauses,” said Kathleen Healy, a partner with Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer in Hong Kong.

not go through the democratic consultation requirements for their policies due to various reasons,” said Feng.

Oral changes Article 11 provides that if both parties orally change the employment contract and if there is no objection within one month, it will be binding for both the employer and employee.

Company policies The draft was also perceived as pro-employee because it stated that if employers failed to go through the necessary democratic consultation procedures for company policies, the courts cannot judge cases based on these policies. In practice, courts hold differing positions as to whether company policies are binding on employees without going through the consultation procedures. “Some judges hold that as long as the content of the company policy complies with the law, this policy should be binding,” said Healy. “In the final version the provision on consultation requirements was removed – the reason is because this clause is very controversial as in reality a lot of companies do

The Interpretation works in conjunction with the recently-amended PRC Employment Contract Law (中華人民共和國勞動合同法). The Law was criticised for simplistic definitions and vague wording that will still leave loopholes over the use of labour dispatch workers. The Opinion can be seen as clear and practical guidance over some of the most common issues that arise in labour disputes, for which there has been no clear legislation since 2008, when the Employment Contract Law was first promulgated.

draft was “moreThepro-union or 最 pro-employee, but

Non-compete The Interpretation has provided welcome guidance over non-compete compensation as Article 6 states that compensation shall equal 30% of the previous 12 months’ average salary. This only applies to non-compete clauses where the compensation amount was not specified in the contract. Article 6 will resolve a common issue that many non-compete clauses do not specify what the non-compete payment will be and can lead to clauses being unenforceable. In addition, employers and employees often did not know how to agree on the non-compete payments as there were no standards. “The Interpretation still does not indicate a statutory standard, but it gives some guidance on how much payment could be regarded as reasonable – 30%,” said Healy.

勞動及人力資源

the final version has become more balanced

| 之前的草案更偏向

工會和僱員的，但最終版本的解釋條文變得平衡了一些

”

Gordon Feng, Paul Hastings, Shanghai 馮明浩，普衡律師事務所，上海

In the past, the courts and labour tribunals held that if the employer cannot provide sufficient written evidence, any changes agreed by the employee are not valid. “But after this Interpretation, the practice will change a lot and disputes will be judged on a case-by-case basis – it is hard to anticipate the overall influence this will have until disputes arise,” said Lu.

Union notification The draft also required employers that have a union to inform them of any termination. However, this has changed in the final version as employers do not have to inform the union until after termination, but before any first instance court proceedings. “Notifying the union can be done at any time before the complaint is filed, for example, during the labour arbitration procedure – typically this is between one to three months after termination,” said Feng.

高人民法院於 1 月 31 日頒布了《最高人民法院關於審理勞動爭議案件適用法律若干問題的解釋（四）》。這是第四份就勞動合同解釋的文件，已從 2 月 1 日起正式生效。 “儘管花了很長時間才頒布，但這一版的解釋是一大進步。之前三版都主要是程序性解釋，但這一版涵蓋了更多實質性問題，如競業禁止和合同的口頭更改等，”元達律師事務所上海辦公室的陸禕媚說道。平衡利益最高人民法院通常會在審查下級法院審理的案件並要求對某些問題作出詳細解釋後頒布司法解釋。頒布這些解釋的目的就在於給予下級法院一定一些內容框架供其遵循參照。去年 8 月出台該解釋的草案版時曾引起很大爭議，因為其中提議將僱員離職前 12 個月的平均工資的 100% 作為競業禁止補償金。這意味著，雇主將需要支付高額的補償金，且法院將需要處理非常多的競業禁止案件。該草案還要求雇主遵循磋商程序以確保法院認為其公司政策具有約束力，這也限制了雇主在競業禁止期間終止競業禁止義務的權力。 “之前的草案更偏工會和僱員的，但最終版本的解釋條文變得平衡了一些；，”普衡律師事務所上海辦公室的勞動合同法律師馮明浩說道。 “所有這些更改都表明這一版的解釋想要通過減輕競業禁止條款下雇主的義務來平衡相關各方的利益，”富而德律師事務所香港辦公室的合伙人Kathleen Healy說道。

中國法律商務2013年回顧

Labour & Employment

競業禁止該解釋在競業禁止補償方面提出了令人滿意的指導意見，因為第 6 條規定補償金應達到前 12 個月平均工資的 30%。這只適用於合同中沒有明確補償金額的競業禁止條款。第 6 條將解決許多競業禁止條款未明確規定競業禁止應支付多少，並因此可能導致條款無法強制執行的普遍問題。此外，由於沒有統一的標準，雇主和僱員通常無法在金額這個問題上達成一致。 “該解釋仍然沒有給出法定的標準，但是給出了一定的指導——多少才是合理的補償，也就是 30%，” Healy說道。公司政策該草案也可以理解為偏向於僱員，因為其中規定如果雇主未能進行民主徵詢公司政策，法院將不能依照公司的政策對案件進行裁決。實際上，對於未通過徵詢程序制定的公司政策是否對僱員具有約束力，法院

News analysis

可以持不同的立場。“一些法官認為，只要公司政策的內容服從法律規定，該政策就應該具有約束力，” Healy說道。 “在最終版中，關於徵詢要求的條款由於備受爭議而遭刪除，因為實際上很多公司的政策由於各種原因都沒有進行過民主徵詢，”馮律師說道。口頭更改合同第 11 條規定：如果雙方當事人對雇傭合同進行了口頭更改且在一個月內沒有任何反對意見，則該口頭更改對雇主和僱員都具有約束力。以前，法院和勞資審裁處都認為如果雇主不能提供足夠的書面證明，則僱員同意的任何更改都無效。 “但是在該解釋稿頒布後，具體實踐將會改變許多，勞資糾紛也將會根據具體案例的實際情況進行裁決。我們現在還很難預測這一改變的總體影響，只有等真實糾紛發生後才能一見分曉，” 陸律師說道。

工會通知草案還要求通過工會通知雇主要終止合同的事情。然而，這一內容在最終版本中更改為只有在合同終止後但在提請任何一審法院訴訟之前，雇主才需要通知工會。 “可以在原告進行控訴之前的任何時候通知工會，例如在勞動仲裁程序進行過程中，但通常是在合同終止後的一到三個月內，”馮律師說道。該解釋將與最近修訂的《中華人民共和國勞動合同法》共同發揮法律效力。該勞動合同法由於過於簡單的定義和模糊不清的措辭而廣受批評，仍然將在勞務派遣工的聘用方面留有巨大漏洞。該指導意見可看作是對勞動爭議中出現的一些最常見問題的明確且實用的指導，因為從 2008 年《勞動合同法》第一次頒布後，始終沒有針對這方面的明確立法。

Employment Contract Law: loopholes revealed | 勞動合同法的法律漏洞 The amendments to China’s 2008 Employment Contract Law have closed some loopholes but simplistic definitions and vague wording have created new ones. Questions also remain over how aggressively the new Law will be enforced | 對 2008 年的勞動合同法的修正案已消除了一些法律漏洞，但其中過於簡單的定義和模糊不清的措辭又帶來了新的漏洞問題。問題焦點還集中在新勞動合同法的執行力度究竟會有多強

ince the PRC Employment Contract Law (中華人民共和國勞動合同法) was promulgated in 2008, the use of dispatch agencies and workers has soared. The main purpose of the amendments, which take effect on July 1 this year, is to remove loopholes that have led to widespread abuse. But the amendments have attracted criticism for lacking clarity and not being sufficiently practical. “Personally, this amendment is a little too far away from the current situation in China. You cannot just pass a law and expect all

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

companies to change overnight after such a long time,” said Zhou Bo of Fangda Partners. Companies choose labour dispatch workers because of the flexibility. It is much easier to terminate a labour dispatch worker than a direct hire, as employers are required to do so on statutory grounds – a threshold much harder to meet. Labour dispatch workers have been widely used by multinational companies and stateowned enterprises, for long-term and regular positions which are contrary to the Law’s intention.

Key amendments Before the amendments, Article 66 stated: “In general, placement shall apply to temporary, ancillary or substitute positions.” The use of the word “general” left the law open to abuse, as positions that did not fall into the three categories were technically still covered. The amendments have changed “general” to “only”, which in theory restricts the use to three categories. The three positions are also now defined: Temporary are those that last for no more than six months, auxiliary are to be treated

勞動及人力資源 INDIA

新聞分析

as supporting positions and not related to the core-business within the company and substitute are those which must be temporarily filled when an employee is on full-time study or leave. “These definitions remain too vague and need to be further interpreted for enforcement – this is another issue,” said Zhou. While the Law tried to remove some of the loopholes available to employees, it has created new ones. “For temporary, once the six months’ duration expires, an employer may create another position with a different name, but same content and thus could get another six months,” said Gordon Feng, an employment law associate from Paul Hastings. “Most controversial is auxiliary, because the definition is too simple and broad – many can fall within the definition. Substituting is also quite interesting, because one can be gone for study for up to two years or longer, it is hard to verify whether a substitute is still valid in practice,” added Feng. The State Council is expected to issue regulations on the permitted ratio of dispatch workers in a company. The percentage has not been decided yet, but it is expected to be less than 50%, because the principle is that direct

this amendment is a little too far away “fromPersonally, the current situation in China. You cannot just pass a law and expect all companies to change overnight after such a long time | 我個人認為，該修正案距離中國目前的實際情況還是有一段距離的。但是你不能只是通過一部法律就指望所有企業在一夜之間發生改變

”

Zhou Bo, Fangda Partners, Shanghai 周博，方達律師事務所，上海

employment should be the main form of employment. Feng expected it to be approximately 30% to 40%. Practitioners agree the amended Law that is heading in the right direction – the definitions have been further refined and will give employees a better cause of action to sue. Article 57 has been revised and increases the entry requirement for labour dispatch service providers to have a minimum registered capital of Rmb2 million ($320,000), from Rmb500,000. In addition, the provider must have a qualified fixed operating place and facilities, internal dispatch management rules must be in accordance with laws and

regulations and the provider must also obtain and register a permit from a competent labour authority. The amended Article 63 emphasises that all labour dispatch agreements must reflect the principle of equal pay for equal work. “This is not a big change from the old rules. Equal pay for equal work has been there since 2008, but effectively no-one enforced it because it’s so difficult to prove what this means,” said Feng. The last major amendment considers penalties. Under Article 92, both the labour dispatch provider and user entity are liable for any violation or breaches of labour dispatch. Fines ranged from Rmb1,000 to Rmb5,000, but have increased to Rmb5,000 to Rmb10,000 for each party. “If you read it carefully, you can see that the law provides if the labour dispatch provider violated the law then the first thing the labour bureau does is to require them to rectify the problem within a limited period, and not directly impose the penalty,” explained Feng. This provides employers with some leeway as they can continue their current practice and not comply with the new amendment – at least until they receive a warning from the labour bureau.

Enforcement “The new revisions are not too restrictive, but it would be subject to how strictly the authorities will enforce these rules. The amendments simply re-illustrate issues which have already been mentioned before. It is a good direction from a long-term perspective, the government

中國法律商務2013年回顧

Labour & Employment

Leading Labour & Employment Lawyers K Lesli Ligorner, Simmon & Simmons Jianjun Ma, Jun He Isasbelle I H Wan, Transasia Lawyers

Source: Asialaw Leading Lawyers 2013

will have to face this directly and protect the labour force who constitute the major part of all China’s work,” said Zhou. Some suggest that whether enforcement will take effect depends on the recent oncein-a-decade power handover. Depending on the new leaders’ stance, enforcement could be effective or lax. The Law does not come into effect until July 1 2013, leaving companies with time to prepare. Companies need to reflect on their existing policies and begin changing their rules relating to labour dispatch workers. Those that are involved in activities contrary to the new revisions should begin to consider alternatives.

自

從 2008 年《中華人民共和國勞動合同法》頒布以來，有關派遣機構和勞工的使用問題迅速增多。今年 7 月 1 日正式生效的修正案的主要目的就是要消除導致濫用勞務派遣的法律漏洞。但是，該修正案由於闡述模糊和實用性不強受到了廣泛批評。 “我個人認為，該修正案距離中國目前的實際情況還是有一段距離的。但是你不能只是通過一部法律就指望所有企業在一夜之間發生改變，”方達律師事務所的周博說道。企業選擇勞務派遣工是由於其比較靈活。與勞務派遣工終止合同要比與直接雇傭員工終止合同簡單許多，因為雇主要有法定理由才能終止勞動合同，而這種法定理由通常是個很難達到的門檻。許多跨國公司和國有企業都大量聘用勞務派遣工擔任長期和常規職位，這實際上與法律的意願背道而馳。

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

News analysis

重要修正在修正案頒布之前，第 66 條規定： “勞務派遣一般在臨時性、輔助性或者替代性的工作崗位上實施。” “一般”一詞的使用造成法律濫用，因為從技術層面講，不在這三個類別中的工作崗位也依然可以包括在勞務派遣之內。修正案將“一般”更改為“只能”，這在理論上將勞務派遣工的使用限定在這三個類別。同時，這三個類別的工作崗位重新定義為：臨時性工作崗位是指存續時間不超過六個月的崗位；輔助性工作崗位是指為主營業務崗位提供服務的非主營業務崗位；替代性工作崗位是指用工單位的勞動者因脫產學習、休假等原因無法工作的一定期間內，可以由其他勞動者替代工作的崗位。 “這些定義還是過於模糊，需要在具體執行時作出進一步解釋，這又成了另一個問題，”周博說道。法律試圖消除某些對僱員有利的漏洞，但同時又帶來了新的漏洞。“對於臨時性工作崗位來講，在六個月期滿之後，雇主可以再設立一個名稱不同但內容相同的工作崗位，這樣就又可以延長六個月的期限，”普衡律師事務所勞動法方面的律師馮明浩說道。 “輔助性工作崗位是最有爭議的，因為其定義過於簡單寬泛，許多崗位都在定義範圍之內。替代性工作崗位的定義也很有意思，因為求學時間可能長至兩年甚至更久，這樣就很難驗證替代性工作崗位在實際情況中是否仍然有效，” 馮律師說道。國務院應該頒布相關條例規定公司內派遣工所佔比例的允許限值。目前這個比例還沒有，但是應該低於 50%，因為基本原則是直接雇傭應該為勞動雇傭的主要形式。馮律師認為該比例大約在 30%到40%。從業者認為修正後的法律正在向正確的方向發展，法律定義正得到不斷完善，也給了僱員一個更充分的起訴理由提起公訴。第 57 條經過修訂後提高了勞務派遣服務提供者的入門要求，最低註冊資本從 50 萬元人民幣提高到 200 萬元人民幣

（32 萬美元）。此外，提供者必須具備與開展業務相適應的固定的經營場所和設施、內部派遣管理規則必須符合相關法律條例規定，且提供者還必須向主管勞動機關申請獲取和註冊許可證。修正後的第 63 條強調：所有勞務派遣協議必須遵守同工同酬的原則。 “這和舊的規定區別不大。從 2008 年開始就有同工同酬的政策了，但是由於很難證明其含義，到現在還沒有真正有效地執行，”馮律師說道。最後一個主要的修正是關於處罰措施方面。第 92 條規定，發生任何違法違規或違反勞務派遣的行為，需由勞務派遣提供者和用工實體共同承擔法律責任。原來的罰款金額是介於 1,000 元人民幣到 5,000 元人民幣之間，但現在對每個當事人都提高到介於 5,000 元人民幣到 10,000 元人民幣之間。 “如果仔細閱讀該規定就可以發現，法律規定如果勞務派遣提供者違反法律，則勞動局要做的第一件事是要求其在規定期限內整改問題，而不是直接做出處罰，” 馮律師解釋道。這給雇主提供了很大的餘地，因為他們至少可以在勞動局發出警告之前，繼續他們現行的做法且不遵守新的修正案。執行 “新的修訂不太具有限制性，但是這也要看權力機關執行這些規定的力度如何。修正案只是重新闡述了之前已提到過的問題。從長遠角度看，這是一個好的方向。政府將不得不直接面對這個問題，並保護這些在中國所有工作中都發揮著主體作用的勞動力，”周律師說道。有人認為，執法是否生效主要取決於最近十年一度的權力交接。新領導人的立場將決定執法力度是有效的還是鬆散的。該法將於 2013 年 7 月 1 日正式生效，這給企業預留了一定的準備時間。企業需要反思現有的政策，並著手改變有關勞務派遣工的規定。如有涉及與新修正案相違背的活動，企業應立即開始考慮其他方案。

Banking Banking

Regulatory Regulatory

Corporate Corporate

Capital markets Capital markets

Keep Keep abreast abreast of of regulatory regulatory developments developments in in the the fi financial nancial sector sector Subscribe to IFLR today and enjoy: Subscribe to IFLR today and enjoy:

• News analysis covering developments in banking, regulatory, • News analysis covering developments banking, regulatory, corporate and capital markets, updated in daily on IFLR.com; corporate and capital markets, updated daily on IFLR.com; • Behind the scenes explanation of new deal structures and • Behind the scenes of new deal structures and the implications forexplanation your practice; the implications for your practice; • Exclusive insight from interviews • Exclusive from interviews with seniorinsight regulators and with regulators and policysenior makers; policy makers; • A focus on legal •A focus on legal developments in developments in emerging markets; emerging markets; • IFLR’s print magazine • IFLR’s print magazine and regular special focus and regular special focus supplements on sectors, supplements on sectors, products and countries; products countries; and muchand more. and much more.

Visit www.iflr.com to take a free 7 day trial Visit www.iflr.com to take a free 7 day trial

To subscribe today call Nick Heath on +44 (0)20 7779 8692 To subscribe today call Nick Heath on +44 (0)20 7779 8692 or contact nheath@euromoneyplc.com or contact nheath@euromoneyplc.com IFLR is available as a single and multi-user subscription IFLR is available as a single and multi-user subscription This communication is from Euromoney Trading, a company registered in England and Wales under company number 954730 with registered office at Nestor House, Playhouse Yard, London EC4V 5EX, UK. This communication is from Euromoney Trading, a company registered in England and Wales under company number 954730 with registered office at Nestor House, Playhouse Yard, London EC4V 5EX, UK.

Mergers & Acquisitions

News analysis

MOFCOM speeds up simple mergers

商務部鼓勵企業間簡單合併 The Ministry of Commerce has set out what merger applications can be classed as simple cases, but has not yet clarified what the streamlined approval process will look like | 商務部已指出哪些合併可視為簡單合併，但尚未闡明簡化的審批流程是怎樣的

n April 3, the Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) released Tentative Provisions on the Criteria Applicable to Simple Cases of Concentrations of Business Operators (Draft for Comments) (商務部關於經營者集中簡易案件適用標準的暫行規定 (徵求意見稿)). MOFCOM released this draft just days after issuing Draft Provisions on imposing restrictive conditions when approving a concentration of business operators. Both pieces of legislation are part of an initiative from the Ministry to streamline and clarify the country’s merger review process, which is often criticised for the time taken to review cases and a lack of transparency.

Common criticisms “A common criticism is that MOFCOM needs more time to complete its review

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

process than other merger control authorities in other countries,” said David Livdahl, a partner with Paul Hastings in Beijing. The efficiency of the Ministry’s merger review process has attracted much public debate in the past. Some of the main reasons for MOFCOM’s inefficiency are a shortage of manpower and its consultation process with other authorities and industrial associations. “The statutory timetable for MOFCOM’s merger review is not too different from the US or the EU, but in practice, MOFCOM’s review frequently takes longer. In the US, a transaction that is a simple case could be cleared in 30 days or sooner, while in China cases often get pushed into later stages,” said Miranda So, a partner with Davis Polk in Hong Kong. So believes the delays centre on resource

constraints, but notes that the PRC Antimonopoly Law (中華人民共和國反壟斷法) is relatively new and the review process should improve as the country gains more experience. At the moment it is not possible for international lawyers to take part in either in the pre-merger consultations or the filing process parts of MOFCOM’s merger review process. “This is inconsistent with international practice, where both international lawyers and local lawyers are permitted to meet with the competition authorities,” said Jenny Sheng, a partner with Paul Hastings in Beijing.

Which cases are simple? The Draft Provisions allow for three rather narrow cases that may be classified as simple cases:

兼並收購 INDIA

新聞分析

Interview | 專訪

Helping to get the deal done | 幫助您達成交易 Thomas Eastling, director of advisory services for American Appraisal in Hong Kong spoke to David Tring about the work he is doing on China M&A and how domestic companies still have a lot to learn when it comes to cross-border transactions | Thomas Eastling 是美國評值公司 (American Appraisal) 駐香港的咨詢服務主管，他向我們的編輯 David Tring 介紹了目前自己在中國並購方面所從事的工作，並指出中國公司在跨境交易方面要學的東西仍有很多

(1) the concentration of business operators accounts for less than 15% of the market share of the relevant market; (2) the concentration of business operators accounts for less than 25% of the market share of the upstream and downstream markets and; (3) the concentration of business operators not from the upstream or downstream market accounts for less than 25% of the market share of each market. The remaining simple cases cover joint ventures and acquisitions of non-Chinese entities that do not engage in economic activity in China. “The Draft Provisions are a step in the right direction, and fit in with similar recent efforts from MOFCOM to develop tools that more closely approximate the EU and US merger review system,” said So. While the Provisions may be a step in the right direction, MOFCOM has also listed several circumstances where it has the right to deny a case as a simple merger even if they qualify. These cases will not be eligible for the simple merger review classification. “By creating certain exceptions in the Draft Provisions, MOFCOM retains its discretion to re-categorise cases falling in the simple case

What is American Appraisal? American Appraisal is the leading international independent valuation company, with history of over 100 years. We provide fair market valuation services for all types of assets that appear on a corporate balance sheet. The company has a global network of offices. The Hong Kong office opened in 1977 and mainland operations began in 1994. In addition to the Hong Kong headquarters, we currently have offices in Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou, Taipei and a domestic affiliate valuation firm in Shenzhen. Our clientele includes both Chinese domestic firms and multinational corporations (MNCs). We offer both international and domestic (statutory) valuation services.I am in charge of transaction advisory services at American Appraisal. This is part of the company’s drive to offer more high value-added services. For Asia, this comprises of mostly M&A, but in Europe this would be corporate finance. What are some of the biggest challenges with due diligence? As in any emerging market, buyers in China have to be willing to dig a little deeper than the standard legal, accounting and business due diligence steps in Western markets. This includes deep background checks on executives and suppliers or forensic accounting investigations into potential corruption issues. Foreign buyers have become much more savvy regarding due diligence these days in China, but surprises can still occur even to the wary. The problems Caterpillar had with a major acquisition last year shows how a financially astute company can still run into problems. What are some of the main lessons Chinese companies need to learn when doing outbound M&A? A growing part of our M&A practice now involves outbound transactions for Chinese buyers. As was the case in Japan during the late 1980’s, Chinese

companies are now experiencing a very steep learning curve in the challenges of cross-border M&A. Such challenges include a lack of English capabilities among the management staff of most Chinese firms, unfamiliarity with the different labour practices and tax regimes in foreign markets and most importantly the necessity of having a good implementation plan for the acquired entity once the deal is done.However, this is definitely changing, especially as Chinese companies increase their foothold around the world. China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC) is an example of a company that has gone very far in the past decade. The outfit’s recent deal with Nexen shows how sophisticated they have become as they learn from each acquisition. Most of the companies I deal with do not have in-house teams, but this will change as they expand. Many Chinese companies are also not willing to pay fees for advisory outfits, but when something goes wrong, you have to have an advisory firm on-board. Any highlighted deals you have worked on over the past year? Much of the deals reported in the press are the large, natural resource acquisitions by the major Chinese state-owned enterprises. However, many mid-sized Chinese businesses are also actively seeking opportunities in the overseas markets to acquire technology, markets and customers. Our M&A focus is on cross-border deals in the small to mid-capital sector. These deals are too small to be of interest to the major investment banks and beyond the reach of the domestic financial advisors to be able to facilitate. Our bread and butter are cross-border M&A deals in the range of US$20 to $50 million that occur on a fairly steady basis through economic cycles. What are some of the trends you are seeing in the M&A space? The most interesting trend in my opinion is the rising potential for significant growth in M&A deals in the

中國法律商務2013年回顧

Mergers & Acquisitions

News analysis

Chinese domestic market. This trend is being driven by the lack of liquidity for many private Chinese firms to fund their business, the inability of private equity firms to exit their investments through the traditional IPO market and the government’s push for consolidation in industry sectors to produce national champions. All of these drivers will encourage a growing number of M&A and restructuring deals in China for well-positioned local advisory firms. Another trend I have noticed in the past year is that more and more multinational corporations are looking to buy-out their joint-venture partners. One driver of this buyout trend is the substantial rights of minority investors in China to influence the MNC’s offshore M&A activities that involve the Chinese operations. Although severing ties with the Chinese partner may also adversely affect the local business, many MNCs are still opting for complete control as opposed to the traditional JV setup. For example, we have seen our clients in the food and manufacturing sectors pursuing the buy out of their minority partners.

公司在財務方面十分精明機敏，也仍可能會出現問題。

What are some of the major issues foreign clients have when doing M&A in China? As many multinationals operating in China looked to restructure outstanding entities and buy out joint venture partners, foreign companies are coming under increasing scrutiny by the State Administration of Taxation (SAT) on the implication of capital gain taxation liability from thesetransactions. In conjunction with our associated Chinese valuation firm, we see a growing demand for our valuation services to assist foreign clients to document and support their transactions in China to protect against a potential capital gains tax exposure.

過去一年中，貴所是否處理過較為引人注目的交易？媒體報導的多數交易都是中國大型國有企業對天然資源的大規模收購。不過，很多中等規模的中國企業也在海外市場積極地尋找機會，以獲得技術、市場和客戶。我們將並購焦點集中於中小資本領域的跨境交易。這些交易對大型投資銀行而言規模過小，不足以引起他們的興趣，但又超出了國內財務顧問的能力範圍，因此這些顧問無法協助客戶達成此類交易。我們賴以生計的業務是處理跨境並購交易，其金額範圍在 2,000 萬到 5,000 萬美元之間。

在進行境外並購時，中國公司需要瞭解哪些主要事項？目前，我們的並購業務中涉及中國買家跨境交易的業務正在不斷發展壯大。和日本在二十世紀八十年代末期遇到的情況一樣，目前中國公司在跨境並購挑戰中處於極其陡峭的學習曲線上。這些挑戰包括：大多數中國公司管理人員的英語能力欠缺，對國外市場不同的勞工條例和稅制不熟悉，而最重要的是，交易達成後，必須具備針對所收購企業的優秀實施計劃。但是，這種情況已大有改觀，尤其是在中國公司的國際地位不斷提高之後。中國海洋石油總公司 (CNOOC) 便是這樣一個例子，在過去十年中，該公司在跨境並購領域已有了很大發展。該公司與尼克森 (Nexen) 達成的最新交易顯示，依靠在每次收購中不斷積累的經驗，他們已變得十分老練。我服務的大多數公司沒有內部法務，但隨著這些公司的擴張，這種情況將會有所變化。另外，很多中國公司不願意出資聘請咨詢機構，但出現問題後就不得不求助咨詢公司。

能不能簡單介紹下美國評值？美國評值是一傢具有 100 多年歷史的領先的國際獨立估值公司。我們針對企業資產負債表中顯示的各類型資產提供公平的市場估值服務。美國評值的辦事處遍布全球。其香港辦事處成立於 1977 年，並於 1994 年開始經營大陸業務。除香港總部之外，我們目前還在北京、上海、廣州和台北設立了辦事處，並在深圳成立了國內附屬估值公司。我們的客戶既有中國國內公司，也有跨國公司 (MNC)。我們同時提供國際和國內（法定）估值服務。我在美國評值主管交易咨詢服務。而這部分服務也是我們公司為客戶提供更高增值服務的驅動力之一。在亞洲，交易咨詢服務主要涉及的是並購事宜，而在歐洲主要是企業融資。

您認為並購領域目前有哪些趨勢？我認為，最令人關注的趨勢是中國國內市場的並購交易開始大幅增長的可能性越來越明顯。推動這一趨勢的因素包括：中國的眾多私有企業缺乏流動資金，因此無法為自己的企業提供資金；私募無法通過傳統的 IPO 市場撤出投資；而政府又正在推動業內合併重組以打造國家明星企業。所有這些推動可為當地咨詢業在中國達成越來越多的並購和重組交易。在過去一年中我還注意到了另一個趨勢，那就是：越來越多的跨國公司正試圖買下其合資夥伴的全部股份。這導致這些公司與其合資夥伴之間的關係出現問題，因為小額投資者在中國擁有實體權。跨國公司意識到了這一情況，但他們的目標是對公司實現全面控制，而不是建立傳統的合資企業。我曾切實見證了食品和製造行業的客戶意圖全面收購他們的小額投資者。

盡職調查面臨的最大挑戰有哪些？與在其他任何新興市場一樣，在中國，買家必須樂於進行比西方市場中標準的法律盡職調查、會計盡職調查及業務盡職調查步驟更深入的調查。包括對管理人員和供應商進行深入的背景調查，或對潛在的腐敗問題進行法務會計調查。近來，國外買家對於在中國進行盡職調查已精明老練了許多，但即使如此謹慎，也仍會發生出人意料的事情。卡特彼勒公司在去年的一宗大型收購中出現的問題說明，即使一家

國外客戶在中國進行並購時會遇到哪些主要問題？隨著眾多在中國運營的跨國企業打算重組負債企業和全面收購合資夥伴的股份，中國稅務總局 (SAT) 對外國公司在這些交易中的增值稅方面的審查也日趨嚴格。在我們與附屬中國評估公司的共同努力下，目前已有越來越多的外國客戶要求我們提供評估服務，以幫助其針對在中國的交易提供證明材料及支持工作，從而規避潛在的增值稅風險。

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

classification as a non-simple case if any such exceptions occur,” said Livdahl. “The absence of clear procedural mechanisms in the current Draft Provisions demonstrates that MOFCOM is still very cautious,” added Sheng.

What does fast-track mean? While the Draft Provisions clearly states what cases will be classified as simple and under what circumstances that status can be revoked, they fail to address how simple cases will be treated. “We expect that consultations with other governmental authorities will not be a mandatory procedure or at least will be simplified, and thus might be approved by MOFCOM within 30 days,” predicted Livdahl. It is unclear how many transactions will qualify for simple merger classification. Practitioners expect the Provisions to be effective by the end of the year and that MOFCOM will release more information to clarify uncertainties in the meantime.

013年4 月 3 日，商務部發佈了《關於經營者集中簡易案件適用標準的暫行規定（徵求意見稿）》。在發佈關於在批准經營者集中行為時施加限制條件的草案規定的幾天後，商務部發佈了此草案。商務部發佈這兩部法規的目的都在於簡化和闡明中國的合併審核流程，該流程經常因為審核案例所需的漫長時間和缺乏透明度而為人詬病。常見批評普衡律師事務所的北京合伙人 David Livdahl 表示，“一個常見批評是與其他國家/地區的其他合併監控機構相比，商務部需要花費更長的時間來完成審核流程”。以前，商務部在合併審核流程方面的效率引起了許多公開爭論。商務部工作低效的幾個主要原因在於，人手不足而造成的冗長的與機構及行業協會的咨詢過程。 “商務部批准合併流程的法定時間表與美國或歐盟的並無太大差異，但在實際情況下，商務部的審核經常要花費較長的時間。在美國，屬於簡單案例的交易事

兼並收購 INDIA

新聞分析

務可在 30 天或更短的時間內完成。而在中國，這些事務通常要拖得更久”，達維律師事務所的香港合伙人蘇雯華說。即使延遲的主要原因在於缺少資源，但鑒於《中華人民共和國反壟斷法》相對較新，所以審核流程會隨該機構經驗的增加而有所改進。目前在商務部的合併審核流程中，外國律師不得參與合併前的咨詢或申請過程。 “這與國際慣例不符，在其他國家或地區，外國律師和本國律師都可以與競爭管理機構接觸”，普衡律師事務所的北京合伙人盛佳說。哪些案例屬於企業間簡單合併？該規定草案規定，以下三種範圍相對狹窄的案例可視為簡單合併。 (1) 相關經營者集中行為在市場中所佔份額低於 15%； (2) 相關經營者集中行為在上游市場和下游市場中所佔份額低於 25%，以及； (3) 非來自上游市場和下游市場的經營者集中行為在各個市場中所佔份額低於 25%。

A common “criticism is that MOFCOM needs more time to complete its review process than other merger control authorities in other countries | 一個常見批評的是，與其他國家或地區的兼並監控機構相比，中國的商務部需要花費更長時間來完成審核流程

”

David Livdahl, Paul Hastings, Beijing David Livdahl, 普衡律師事務所, 北京

其他類型的簡單案例包括對未涉及中國經濟活動的外國實體進行的合資和收購。 “該草案是朝著正確方向邁了一步，而且與商務部最近為制定更接近歐盟和

美國合併審核流程的工具所做的相似努力一致，” 蘇律師說。雖然方向是正確的，但商務部還列出了一些例外情況，在這些情況下令商務部有權拒絕符合條件的案例成為簡單合併。這些案例將無法列入簡單合併審核類型。 “在該草案規定中添加這些例外情況表示，如果發生任何情況，商務部保留將保留否決的權利，”Livdahl 說。 “當前草案規定中缺少明確的程序機制，這表示商務部仍然非常謹慎，” 盛律師說。快速通道意味著什麼？草案規定明確只是界定了何為簡單合併，但卻未解決如何處理簡單合併。我們希望與其他政府機構的咨詢協商將不再是一項必要程序，或至少應該簡化，這樣或許可以在 30 天內獲得商務部批准，”Livdahl 預測。至今我們還無法確定有多少案子可以符合簡單合併的條件。從業者希望該規定可以在今年年末前生效並且商務部能夠同時發佈更多信息以闡明不確定因素。

Why Chinese companies are using Hong Kong for outbound M&A | 為什麼中國公司選擇在香港進行對外 M&A Chinese outbound investment has grown exponentially in the past two years, but as domestic companies become more ambitious, does Hong Kong still have a role to play? | 在過去兩年裡，中國的境外投資成倍增長，但當國內公司變得越來越有野心，香港是否仍然有用武之地？

“

When Chinese companies think about outbound, they always think about Hong Kong,” said Jeffrey Mak, a partner at DLA Piper’s Hong Kong office who specialises in securities and corporate transactions. In 2010, Chinese outbound investment reached $56.5 billion. A year later, that amount doubled to $116 billion. Chinese companies have become more adventurous

with their investments. They are looking farther afield and tapping into new markets. Bright Food’s two high-profile acquisitions in the UK and France and Dalian Wanda Group’s acquisition of AMC in the US highlight these developments and how complex outbound investment is becoming. Mak, who recently assisted a mainland listed company, Success Well Investments,

take over a Hong Kong listed company, Tonic Industries, argues that Hong Kong has many advantages when it comes to outbound transactions.

Transactional haven The territory is culturally and geographically close to the mainland. In addition, the stock market is also gaining traction with investors.

中國法律商務2013年回顧

News analysis

Mergers & Acquisitions

Chinese companies think about outbound, â&#x20AC;&#x153;theyWhen always think about Hong Kong â&#x20AC;?

| ç&#x2022;śä¸ĺ&#x153;&#x2039;ĺ&#x2026;Źĺ?¸č&#x20AC;&#x192;ć&#x2026;Ž

é&#x20AC;˛čĄ&#x152;čˇ¨ĺ˘&#x192;äş¤ć&#x2DC;&#x201C;ć&#x2122;&#x201A;ďź&#x152;äť&#x2013;ĺ&#x20AC;&#x2018;ĺž&#x20AC;ĺž&#x20AC;ć&#x153;&#x192;č&#x20AC;&#x192;ć&#x2026;ŽéŚ&#x2122;ć¸Ż

Jeffrey Mak, DLA Piper, Hong Kong éşĽć&#x152;Żč&#x2C6;&#x2C6;, ć?č?Żĺž&#x2039;ĺ¸Ťäş&#x2039;ĺ&#x2039;&#x2122;ć&#x2030;&#x20AC;, éŚ&#x2122;ć¸Ż

A vibrant stock market is essential for mainland companies looking to raise funds. Hong Kong and the mainland also enjoy multiple advantages under the Closer Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA). The bilateral agreements facilitate cross-border transactions and companies can enjoy certain tax benefits. For example, when using a Hong Kongbased company as an intermediate, business enterprises can enjoy a lower tax rate when remitting profits via the Hong Kong company. â&#x20AC;&#x153;By using a Hong Kong company, investors have the flexibility of a better oriented struc-

ture, which is less prone to income tax,â&#x20AC;? said Mak. Hong Kongâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s infrastructure is also attractive. Banking and legal professionals can use market intelligence and better advise mainland companies, who are used to dealing with a closed and regulated market. The guidance offered by this talent is invaluable to potential investors from across the border.

International platform With its multiple advantages, the territory also provides a perfect platform from which companies can expand their business operations.

â&#x20AC;&#x153;Chinese companies do not just have a mind to develop a business in Hong Kong, they are also thinking about how to get into the international market,â&#x20AC;? noted Mak. Establishing or acquiring a presence in Hong Kong brings the company into a credible international network. The territory opens doors to international branches and provides important connections abroad. The 2009 acquisition of Taifook Securities by Haitong Securities for $253 million is an example of a company making use of that platform to further develop into other parts of the world, said Mak.

Preparation Despite Hong Kongâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s status as a haven, preparation is still needed. The territory opens a door, but understanding the legal differences and possessing market intelligence are essential. â&#x20AC;&#x153;The acquirers would also have their own studies and integration plan. They need to

>7;:' '" % <:;=8 ' $ 1 ,4 $

. ! . && . % .) && '&5 ! !' % ' ##%" '" .& ! && ! '% ' 1

1". % 0"% ! '" / "# ! " % & ' % # .) !'& ' ! ' & "! % ! & .! $. ! '& " .& "! # ! 1". . ! / % / . #%" . '3 %" & !) 3 .& ! && ! # %&# )/ &6 #%" %

& #% ) # & & ! & / !'" ' " "0 ! 1 !'&5

â&#x20AC;Ż / "# ! ' && '3 â&#x20AC;Ż ,! ' ! ! ! 7 " ! ' 3 ! â&#x20AC;Ż . ! '%"! !' '. %"# %'1 "%(" "6

%'" 0& ')( ' ( $*$ 5 ' 8 %$ ' $ /%'!( %&(6 !'%" '" "' !" " 13 ! & 04 )/%'! $ %&&%')-$ * ( $ "- 6 " ' % #)"! ' ". > % ! 1 +3 ! !! % % 1 + 9 6 ''1 $%/" ( ".! % 9 +"%! 1 4 . '%/$ % !3 9 % '"%4 % " %$ +"%! 1 4 '" ') 4 $'1 9 % & !'4 #%$ /%') 4 '*$% ' % 4 " $ ' 4 % ' 1 $ # %'! %4 2 $ ".! % 9 +"%! 14 '$ # " )%$ ".! % 9 4 9 "% 6 .%' % ! "% )"! ! "! ! % &'% )"! ! ".! "! ".% 0 & ' '

///7 &(7 %# 5 $ %: &(7 %#

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

新聞分析

兼並收購 INDIA

Mainland companies are using Hong Kong as a gateway to the world

look at integrating the target with their business and it is important for the future that they try maximise the opportunities from the transaction,” said Mak. The M&A market is not a quiet space, with $35.4 billion already invested in Chinese outbound deals in the first half of this year. Mak notes that there might be a shift in activity attention from initial public offerings (IPOs) to M&A transactions as well, which will only increase Hong Kong’s role as a platform for outbound transactions.

“

當中國公司考慮進行跨境交易時，他們往往會考慮香港，”歐華律師事務所香港辦事處的合伙人麥振興說，他在企業兼並案方面非常專業。 2010 年，中國的境外投資金額達到了 565 億美元。一年後，這一金額翻倍為 1160 億美元。中國公司在投資方面變得越來越大膽。他們將眼光放得更遠，積極進入新興市場。光明食品在美國和法國的兩筆高調收購以及大連萬達集團在美國對 AMC 的收購突出展現了這一髮展以及境外投資的複雜性。麥律師最近幫助招商局地產的離岸子公司 Success Well Investments 收購了香港

上市公司東力實業Tonic Industries，他表示香港在跨境交易方面擁有很多優勢。交易避風港香港在文化和地理方面都與大陸十分接近。此外，股票市場也在吸引投資者。對於希望籌集資金的大陸公司而言，一個充滿活力的股票市場十分重要。香港和大陸也享受著“更緊密經貿關係“（Closer Economic Partnership Agreement，CEPA）帶來的諸多優勢。這一雙邊協議促進了跨境交易，而且相關公司可以享受特定稅務優勢。例如，如果使用香港公司作為中介，那麼企業在通過該香港公司匯寄利潤時，可享受低稅率。麥律師說：“借助香港公司，投資者就可以靈活地應對所得稅”。香港的商業環境的根基也十分有吸引力。金融和法律專業人士十分熟悉規範市場的流程，可以借助市場資訊更好地為大陸公司提供建議。對於要做跨境投資的投資者而言，由這些人才提供的指導是無價的。國際平台香港是一個完美的平台，可供各公司在此擴展業務範圍。

麥律師說，“中國的公司不僅想在香港發展業務，而且還考慮如何打入國際市場”。在香港建立或獲取業務可讓公司進入可靠的國際網絡。香港打開了通往海外業務的大門。麥律師說，2009 年海通證券以 2.53 億美元收購大福證券，這一收購案就是一家公司利用這一平台進一步向世界其他地區發展的案例。準備工作儘管香港堪稱避風港，但您仍然需要進行準備工作。特區會為您打開一扇門，但是理解其中的法律區別以及處理市場信息是至關重要的。麥律師說，“收購方必須有自己的研究和合併計劃，他們需要監控目標與自己業務的合併，而且需要盡力從交易中發掘出最大的機會，這一點對將來十分重要”。兼並市場並不平靜，2013年度上半年中國對外貿易投資總額已達到 354 億美元。麥律師解釋說，活動焦點可能也會從首次公募 (IPO) 轉移到兼並交易上，這只會進一步強化香港作為對外交易平台的角色。

中國法律商務2013年回顧

Mergers & Acquisitions

David Tang

Leading M&A Lawyers AllBright Law Offices 14 F, Citigroup Tower, 33 Hua Yuan Shi Oiao Road, Shanghai 200120, China Tel: +86 21 6105 5665 Fax: +86 21 6105 5664 Email: davidtang@allbrightlaw.com Website: www.allbrightlaw.com

Mergers & Acquisitions Elliott Chen Youchun, JunZeJun Law Office Dennis Deng, Dacheng Law Offices Lee Edwards, Shearman & Sterling David Fu, Global Law Office Karen Ip, Herbert Smith Freehills Weibo Jiang, Haiwen & Partners

Career highlights: David Tang is a partner of AllBright Law Offices. His primary practice areas include general corporate, commerical and finance, including cross-border direct investments, mergers and acquisitions, corporate restructuring and corporate finance. He also has extensive experience in advising on legal matters involving corporate daily operations, such as corporate compliance, employment-related matters, intellectual property protection, commercial dispute resolution and so on. Mr Tang has been advising numerous Fortune 500 Global and other multinational and foreign companies in the automobile, chemical, power and energy, life science, retailing, consumer products, logistics, technology, telecommicaitons sectors in their investments, acquisitions and daily business operations since he started his professional career.

Jie Lan, Haiwen & Partners

In addition to inbound investment, Mr Tang also advises large- and medium-sized Chinese companies in doing business or raising funds in overseas markets, particularly assisting Chinese companies’ outbound direct investment, mergers and acquisitions and fund-raising through public offerings (US and HK) or private placement. In recent years, he has helped several Chinese domestic conglomerates in the industries of automobile and new energy successfully acquire overseas local counterparts, and represented a number of Chinese companies that deal with new energy, natural resources and security and surveilance successfully go public in overseas markets.

Hubert Tse, Boss & Young

Mr Tang has been consecutively ranked as one of the leading PRC Corporate and M&A lawyers by several legal ranking organisations such as Chambers & Partners, Asialaw and Legal 500.

Jiping Zhang, Haiwen & Partners

David Tang’s major publications include: Safe registration of China round-trip investments (China Law & Practice, Jun 2011); Long Way to Go - China’s Anti-monopoly Law (Competition Law 360, Nov 2007); China Further Clarifies Customs Duty and Value-Added Tax Exemptions for Foreign Investment Enterprises (Practical US/International Tax Strategies, Sep 2007); China’s Foreign Invested Companies Changing & Converging with Domestically Owned Enterprises (Hong Kong Lawyer, Sep 2006); China Customs Valuation: Software Exempted; E-content and IP Royalties Still at Risk (China Law & Practice, Sep 2006); Renewable Energy Law Encourages a Hundred Flowers to Bloom (China Law & Practice, Apr 2006). Mr Tang frequently speaks at conferences on subjects related to investment and mergers and acquisitions in China. Education & Professional Membership: Fudan University School of Law All China Lawyers Association

David Liu, Jun He (see biography p.8) Gang Liu, Commerce & Finance Law Offices Kenneth Lu, Fangda Partners Doug Markel, Simpson Thacher & Bartlett Michael Mei, Llinks Law Offices Gregory Miao, Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom Geert Potjewijd, De Brauw Blackstone Westbroek Anthony Qiao, Zhong Lun Law Firm Charles Qin, Llinks Law Offices David Tang, AllBright Law Offices (see biography) Kirk Tong, Jun He David Wang, Paul Hastings Janofsky & Walker Anthony Wang, Weil Gotshal & Manges Chun Wei, Sullivan & Cromwell Niping Wu, Kaye Scholer Wei Xiao, Jun He Dorothy Xing, Concord & Partners David Yu, Llinks Law Offices Howard Zhang, Davis Polk & Wardwell Philip Zhang, AllBright Law Offices Jonathan Zhou, Fangda Partners Steve Zhu, AllBright Law Offices General Corporate Practice Jesse Chang, TransAsia Lawyers Chen Xin, Wang Jing & Co Weizhong Deng, Jun He Jianxiang Ding, Jun He Yang Gao, Fangda Partners Rocky Lee, Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft Adam Li Qi, Jun He Hong Li Ma, Jun He Kevin Qian, MWE Law Offices Philip Qu, TransAsia Lawyers David Tang, AllBright Law Offices George Zhao Wang, Jun He Tang Yue, Jun He Philip Zhang, AllBright Law Offices Deming Zhao, HaoLiWen Partners Phenix Zheng, Wang Jing & Co

Source: Asialaw Leading Lawyers 2013

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

觀察

兼並收購

Investors look west Yang Yuhua of Alliance J&S Law Firm provides an overview of trends in both inbound and outbound investment and analyses the latest decisions on the controversial VIE structure 1. What have been the key legislative developments affecting M&A in the past year? The Foreign Investment Industrial Guidance Catalogue (Amended in 2011), Catalogue for Foreign Investment in the Dominant Industries of the Central and Western Regions (2013 Revision) and the Guiding Opinions on Accelerating Promotion of the Merger and Reorganisation of Enterprises in Key Industries issued by Ministry of Industry and Information Technology and National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) in early 2012 represent a blueprint for M&A in nine sectors, which will have a great impact on the M&A market in terms of the industries to be invested in. More policy encouragement is found in sectors relating to environmental protection, renewable energy, high technology and services. Structural adjustments and industrial integration in the nine sectors will also provide huge market opportunities for M&A transactions. From the end of 2012 to May this year, the State Administration of Foreign Exchange (SAFE) issued the Circular on Further Improving and Revising the Foreign Exchange Control Policy on Direct Investment, the Measures for the Administration of Foreign Debt Registration and their operational guidelines, and the Provisions for Foreign Exchange Control in Connection with Direct Investment in China by Foreign Investors and their supporting documents. These provisions further simplify and integrate the processes and policies pertaining to FDI-related foreign exchange registrations, account opening and use, the receipt and payment of funds and foreign exchange settlement and sales. These will have a significant impact on the practical operation of obtaining relevant FIEs capital flows through M&A and the implementation of business strategies. The impact of recent administrative decisions, court judgments and arbitral awards on the legality and validity of the use of a VIE structure remains unclear. In August 2012 the Anti-monopoly Bureau of the Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) issued a decision on the conditional anti-monopoly approval of Wal-mart’s acquisition of Newheight Holdings, a company that owns Yihaodian, which expressly precludes Wal-mart from engaging in the value-added telecommunications business (VATB) services currently provided by Yihaodian via the VIE structure. This is the first time MOFCOM has explicitly prohibited the use of a VIE structure in a formal decision. The Supreme People’s Court (SPC) made a ruling in late 2012 on a dispute that lasted for 12 years between Chinachem Financial Services (Chinachem), a Hong Kong investor, and China Small and Medium Enterprises Investment (the SME Company), a PRC firm which held shares in Minsheng Bank, a financial institution established in China, on behalf of Chinachem. The SPC ruled, among

The impact of recent administrative decisions, court judgments and arbitral awards on the legality and validity of the use of a VIE structure remains unclear 中國法律商務2013年回顧

Mergers & Acquisitions

Insights

other things, that the agreements between Chinachem and the SME Company were invalid on the grounds that these agreements established an entrustment relationship, which circumvented PRC laws and regulations on foreign investment in the financial industry and constituted “concealing illegal intentions with a lawful form”. In addition, the Shanghai Commission of the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC) ruled in 2010 and 2011 in two related cases involving the VIE arrangement of an online games operating company, stating that the VIE agreements were void on the grounds that such arrangements violated the mandatory provisions of administrative regulations prohibiting foreign investors from investing in the online games operation business, and constituted “concealing illegal intentions with a lawful form”. It remains unclear whether the recent decisions are generally applicable decisions on the legality or validity of VIE agreements or VIE structures. As the PRC authorities have been silent on VIE structures since their inception, the recent cases indicate a negative attitude on the part of the PRC government. It highlights the importance of discussion and preparation of an adjustment plan for the existing structure or a new design of the transaction structure in M&A practice.

2. Which sectors have attracted the most inbound M&A investment and why? According to the relevant statistical data, the most popular sectors of the Chinese M&A market remain in metals, mining, telecoms and manufacturing. In addition, the nine major sectors including car production, steel, cement, shipbuilding, electrolytic aluminium, rare earth, electronic information, pharmaceuticals and agriculture will undergo a massive reorganisation driven by government policies and more foreign investment through M&A will be attracted to these nine sectors.

3. This year, the NDRC and MOFCOM issued the Catalogue for Foreign Investment in the Dominant Industries of the Central and Western Regions (2013 Revision) – How do you expect the Catalogue to affect M&A in China’s interior? What advice can you offer to foreign acquirers of companies in China’s regions? The revised edition of the Catalogue contains more relevant items in labour-intensive and service sectors. Vehicle manufacturing projects that have been removed from the Foreign Investment Industrial Guidance Catalogue are now included in this regional Catalogue, which is another highlight of the revision. The Catalogue will undoubtedly stimulate foreign investment, including throughM&A, in the central and western regions. Vehicle manufacturing projects are included in the encoraged catagory in 11 provinces. For foreign automobile brands that have not yet been localised, as well as joint venture enterprises that still expect to expand production in China, the list of provinces provides them with some significant guidance. This also illustrates China’s new reform plan for the automotive industry.

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

MOFCOM is aiming to improve the efficiency and transparency of reviews relating to concentrations of business operators Many government policies, for example the simplification of the procedures for approval and preferential tax measures, have been adopted to encourage foreign investors and enterprises based in coastal areas to step up investment in the central and western regions. Having a good knowledge of all the preferential policies is one of the prerequsites for participating in M&A in the central and western regions.

4. What key trends are you seeing in outbound M&A Deals? China’s appetite for foreign energy and resources assets has been very clear for some time and the bulk of China’s overseas investment will continue to be within the energy and resources industries, which are championed by state-owned enterprises. At the same time, the increasing participation of private capital is another trend in China’s outbound M&A and private companies’ M&A deals have become increasingly varied. They are inclined to acquire industrial technologies and consumer-linked businesses overseas, aiming to bring advanced western technologies, know-how, intellectual property and brands back for use in the Chinese domestic market.

5. What are some of the biggest challenges faced when carrying out due diligence before M&A deals? How do you overcome these challenges? In terms of inbound M&A for foreign investors, one of the biggest challenges affecting the success of the transaction is the complete and accurate grasp of the real situation of the target equity or assets. A seemingly comprehensive due diligence questionnaire cannot guarantee that all the problems will be discovered. What is needed is to find out everything about the target assets and practically formulate an objective assessment based on the attributes of the target company, the characteristics of the target assets, the specific requirements of the local industry and policies and then to decide the price, structure, payment method and investment protection measures of the transaction. In terms of outbound M&A for Chinese enterprises, different languages, culture, laws and regulations, and investment environment are undoubtedly the biggest challenges. The only solution is to obtain practical and effective support and cooperation from professional teams at home and abroad; at the same time Chinese enterprises need to learn quickly and accumulate valuable experience from each transaction. Opportunism in recklessly concluding a transaction without paying for the appropriate professional services often leads to a loss which outweighs the gain.

觀察

Author biography Yang Yuhua Yang Yuhua is a partner of Alliance J&S Law Firm. She graduated from Peking University in 1999 with an LLB degree and a bachelor’s degree in Economics. Ms Yang received an LLM degree from University of Pennsylvania Law School and a Certificate of Study in Business and Public Policy from Wharton School in 2006. From 2004 to 2005, Ms Yang participated in the Lord Chancellor’s Training Scheme (UK) for young Chinese lawyers, and during that period she worked with various law firms in London and Hong Kong. From 2006 to 2007, Ms Yang worked in a New York law firm, Phillips Nizer LLP. Ms Yang was qualified in China and admitted to the New York State Bar. Ms Yang focuses on the fields such as corporate, securities and capital markets, foreign inbound investment, advising Chinese companies on outbound investment, international trade and other cross-border transactions, and has valuable international practice experience. She has advised on a number of projects and transactions including enterprise reforms, corporate reorganisations, M&A, divestments, offerings and listings inside and outside China, corporate finance and project finance, investment funds and has served different clients as outside general counsel on their day-to-day business operations and is involved in several heavy negotiations and high-profile complex transactions. Ms Yang possesses sound professional skills and multi-jurisdictional practice experience to provide practically efficient and effective services in the relevant areas both domestically and internationally. Ms Yang is proficient in English.

In terms of indirect overseas acquisitions involving domestic assets, it is rather risky to assume that the Chinese government’s approval or regulation could be avoided. It is a smart move to make yourself aware of the latest laws and regulations and prepare the relevant plans.

6. Which deal has stood out as a particular highlight of the year for your firm? Why was it innovative? From late 2012 to the beginning of 2013, a team of Alliance J&S assisted one of the overseas subsidiaries of TCL Corporation to obtain the 10-year naming rights to Grauman’s Chinese Theatre, a landmark building on Hollywood Boulevard in Los Angeles (TCL Chinese Theatre). The nature of the transaction target was relatively special. It is neither equity nor a physical asset in the traditional sense but a combination of relevant real-estate related interests and great intangible assets under relevant US laws and the actual governing law is a third country law. Both the nature of the transaction target and

兼並收購

the tough negotiations conducted before the final determination of the transaction price and TCL’s complicated 10-year payment made this deal a particularly notable one.

7. Can you provide an update on MOFCOM’s merger review process? When are the simplified reviews likely to be up and running? In March and April this year, MOFCOM published the Provisions for the Imposition of Restrictive Conditions on Concentrations of Business Operators (Draft for Comments) and the Tentative Provisions on the Criteria Applicable to Simple Cases of Concentrations of Business Operators (Draft for Comments) respectively, inviting comments from relevant people and the public. These measures suggest that the promulgation of supporting anti-monopoly provisions is being expedited by MOFCOM and MOFCOM is aiming to improve the efficiency and transparency of reviews relating to concentrations of business operators.

8. What is the outlook for M&A in the year ahead? Due to liquidity and other factors, the volume and value of M&A transactions might decrease. However, the quality of successful M&A transactions is expected to increase. From the policy and regulation aspect, in the wake of the new rules on the foreign exchange control of foreign investments announced by SAFE and the Catalogue for Foreign Investment in the Dominant Industries of the Central and Western Regions, a series of policies relating to the improvement of the examination and approval process and of the investment environment are expected to be adopted this year, which will lead M&A players to concentrate on the modern agriculture, high-tech, advanced manufacturing, energy saving and environmental protection, new energy, modern service industries and other sectors.

9. If you could offer one piece of advice to foreign clients about to engage in M&A, what would it be? Given the many special characteristics of the Chinese market, foreign investors should be on the highest alert and undertake thorough research in the Chinese policy and regulatory environment as well as the local investment conditions at the outset when choosing a transaction target and designing the transaction. They must maintain an operational flexibility and seek practical professional advice.

中國法律商務2013年回顧

Mergers & Acquisitions

Insights

投資者朝向西部發展頤合中鴻律師事務所的楊玉華律師綜觀境內外投資的趨勢，並對最近引起爭議的 VIE結構裁決作出分析

1. 過去1年，並購方面有什麼主要的法規出臺？《外商投資產業指導目錄（2011修訂）》、《中西部地區外商投資優勢產業目錄（2013修訂）》及2012年初工信部、國家發改委等發布的《關于加快推進重點行業企業兼並重組的指導意見》確定九大行業未來兼並重組的藍圖，均對並購市場的產業風向標產生重要影響。環保、可再生能源、高科技和服務行業等進一步受到政策鼓勵，九大行業的結構調整和產業整合亦將為並購交易提供巨大市場機會。 2012年底至今年5月間，國家外管局在外匯資本項目領域頒布了《進一步改進和調整直接投資外匯管理政策的通知》、《外債登記管理辦法》和操作指引、《外國投資者境內直接投資外匯管理規定》及配套文件等一系列規定，進一步簡化並整合了外商投資外匯登記、賬戶開立與使用、資金收付及結售匯等環節和政策。這些外匯新規對外國投資者以並購方式取得相關FIEs的資金流和企業發展戰略的執行均在具體實務操作層面產生重要影響。 VIE結構的合法有效性在近期的行政決定、法院判例和仲裁裁決的影響下顯得愈發撲朔迷離。2012年8月，商務部反壟斷局公布了對沃爾瑪公司收購紐海控股有限公司（擁有電子商務平臺“1號店”）股份交易的反壟斷審查結果，對該交易附加限制性條件——沃爾瑪不得通過VIE架構從事1號店運營的增值電信業務。這是商務部首次在正式決定中明確提及對“VIE結構”的禁用。2012年底，最高人民法院對華懋金融服務有限公司與中國中小企業投資有限公司之間持續了12年之久的有關代持民生銀行股份的爭議做出了裁定，認定兩者之間的委托關係規避對外商投資金融領域的規定，“以合法形式掩蓋非法目的”，協議無效。此外，貿仲上海分會於2010及2011年在兩起涉及網絡游戲運營公司VIE結構案中，以VIE結構違反了禁止外國投資者投資網絡游戲運營業務行政法規的強制性規定，“以合法形式掩蓋非法目的”，裁決VIE協議無效。儘管上述個案對VIE協議或VIE架構的普遍適用性存在若干不確定性，但就中國政府機關自VIE架構最初開始使用後就一直保持沉默的態度而言，這些最新案例所釋放出的信號顯然並不太積極。並購實務中，對現存架構的調整預案及新的交易結構設計的論證和準備的重要性日益彰顯。 2. 哪些行業吸引最多境內並購投資？原因何在？統計數據顯示，目前吸引最多外資的領域仍廣泛集中在金屬、采礦、電信和製造業。此外，汽車、鋼鐵、水泥、船舶、電解鋁、稀土、電子信息、醫藥和農業產業化九大行業因國家政策的主導將經歷一場洗牌，亦勢必吸引外資以並購方式參與其中。

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

VIE結構的合法有效性在近期的行政決定、法院判例和仲裁裁決的影響下顯得愈發撲朔迷離

觀察

作者簡歷楊玉華 (合伙人) 楊玉華律師1999年畢業于北京大學法學院及中國經濟研究中心(CCER, 現北京大學國家發展研究院)，獲得法學學士學位及經濟學學士學位；2006年畢業于美國賓夕法尼亞大學法學院及沃頓商學院，獲得法學碩士學位及商務與公共政策研修證書。此外，楊玉華律師于2004 - 2005年赴英參加中國青年律師培訓項目，期間在倫敦及香港律師事務所工作。楊律師于2006 - 2007年間在紐約 Phillips Nizer LLP 律師事務所工作。楊律師擁有中國律師執業資格、美國紐約州律師執業資格。楊律師側重于公司、證券與資本市場、外商對華投資、中資企業境外投資、國際貿易及其他高端涉外業務，並具有國際執業經驗，曾擔任企業改制、公司重組、收購兼並、重大資產處置、境內外股票發行與上市、公司及項目融資、證券投資基金、風險投資及私募股權投資基金等項目的專項法律顧問，協助中外客戶進行重大商務談判、複雜的各類交易設計和實施，並為公司、企業提供日常經營法律咨詢。工作語言：除中文以外，楊律師完全勝任以英文作為工作語言提供專業服務。

3. 今年，國家發改委、商務部出臺了《中西部地區外商投資優勢產業目錄（2013修訂）》。您預計《目錄》對於在中國內陸地區進行的並購有什麼影響？您對外國投資者收購中國內陸地區的企業有什麼建議？該目錄的最新修訂增加了勞動密集型和服務業領域相關項目；且在《外商投資產業指導目錄》中已不再出現的整車製造項目，此次入選也成為關注重點。該目錄無疑將引導外資以並購方式等向中西部地區相應領域發展，如此次把整車項目列入鼓勵範圍的11個省份，對那些尚未國產落地以及仍希望在華擴產的的汽車品牌，這份名單具有特殊導向意義，國家在新一輪汽車產業調整中的布局意圖也浮出水面。目前中西部地區在簡化審批手續、財稅政策方面均支持鼓勵外資和沿海的外資企業在中西部地區擴大投資。充分瞭解這些優惠政策，則是涉足中西部地區並購交易的前提之一。 4. 境外並購方面有什麼主要趨勢？毋庸置疑，基于中國對原料能源的需求，中國的境外並購仍主要集中在以國有企業主導的能源和資源領域，但不容忽視的是，民營資本正越來越多地參與到境外並購，且涉及領域更為廣泛。民營資本傾向收購西方的工業技術及消費相關的行業，致力于將先進技術、訣竅、知識產權、品牌等引入廣闊的國內市場。 5. 進行並購交易前的盡職調查時，遇到的最大挑戰是什麼？您如何克服這些挑戰？對于外資在中國市場的並購交易而言，全面、準確地瞭解並購目標股權或資產的真實狀況仍是對一單交易是否成功的最大挑戰。一份貌似包羅萬象的盡職調查清單並不能保證發現

兼並收購

所有的問題。需務實地根據目標公司的情況、目標資產的特性、具體地方行業和政策環境的要求，全面瞭解目標資產，形成客觀的評估，進而確定交易價格、架構和支付方式及有效的投資保障措施等。對于中國企業的海外並購而言，迥异的語言、文化、法律、投資環境無疑是中國公司面臨的最大挑戰。應對之策無他，唯有通過境內外有效的專業團隊的支持和配合，為交易保駕護航，同時中國公司在每一單交易中迅速學習、積累寶貴經驗。吝于支付專業費用而莽撞倉促達成交易的投機取巧行為常常是得不償失。對于涉及中國境內資產的海外間接並購而言，假定可以規避中國政府部門的審批或監管是危險的，對最新政策法規的研究和相關預案的準備則是明智之舉。 6. 可否介紹您的事務所今年處理的一項重要交易？該項交易具有怎樣的創新性？ 2012年底至2013年初，頤合中鴻律師協助TCL集團旗下一海外公司成功取得美國洛杉磯好萊塢星光大道的地標性建築“好萊塢中國大劇院”為期十年的冠名權（好萊塢TCL中國大劇院）。該交易的交易標的屬性相對特殊，既非股權、亦非傳統意義上的實物資產，而是相關美國法下部分房地產相關權益和巨大無形資產的結合物，而有關法律文件的適用法律則選定為第三國法律，且通過艱苦談判而形成的交易價格和TCL 為期十年的複雜支付方式的最終確定均令此交易非同尋常。 7. 商務部的並購審查程序有什麼最新發展？簡易審查程序將於什麼時候實施？今年三四月，商務部相繼頒布了《關于經營者集中附加限制性條件的規定（徵求意見稿）》和《關于經營者集中簡易案件適用標準的暫行規定（徵求意見稿）》，向有關各方及公眾徵集意見。這些積極的舉措表明商務部正在持續努力加快反壟斷法配套規定的制定，並致力于提高經營者集中的審查效率和透明度。 8. 您認為並購於未來1年有什麼發展？受流動性等因素影響，並購交易數量和金額可能會下降，不過市場也許期望成功實施的並購交易的質量有所提升。政策法規層面，繼外匯管理新規、《中西部地區外商投資優勢產業目錄》出臺後，涉及完善外資審批程序、改善投資環境的系列政策有望年內出臺，並可能引導並購向現代農業、高新技術、先進製造、節能環保、新能源、現代服務業等領域集中。 9. 如果您要為預備進行並購交易的外國客戶提供一項建議，那會是怎樣的建議？鑒于中國市場的諸多特性，外資並購中的境外投資者應在遴選交易對象、交易設計之初即保持對中國政策法規環境和交易實施地的地方投資環境予以最高的警醒和充分的研究，預留靈活操作的空間，尋求務實的專業意見。

中國法律商務2013年回顧

Private Equity

News analysis

CSRC allows capital markets competition

中國證券監督管理委員會鼓勵資本市場競爭 New Provisions have created competition between brokers by allowing foreign institutional investors to use more than one securities dealer | 新規定允許境外機構投資者選用多家證券交易商，因此導致了經紀行之間展開競爭

he Provisions on Issues Relevant to the Implementation of the <Measures for the Administration of Securities Investments in China by Qualified Foreign Institutional Investors> 於實施〈合格境外機構投資者境內證券投資管理辦法〉有關問題的規定 from the China Securities and Regulatory Commission was issued on July 27 and became effective the same day. The Provisions strengthens supervision and aims to attract more foreign long-term institutional money into the Chinese capital markets. The CSRC is looking to accelerate cross-border flows and further open up domestic financial markets to foreign investors,” said Hubert Tse, a partner at Chinese law firm Boss & Young in Shanghai who

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

advises qualified foreign institutional investors (QFIIs) in China. Article 13 of the Provisions allows QFIIs to choose more than one securities dealer. For the first time, each QFII can use three domestically registered securities companies at the Shanghai Stock Exchange and the Shenzhen Stock Exchange to trade securities. “QFIIs were only allowed to choose one broker, which lacks flexibility if problems or disputes arise with their brokers. The switch from one broker to another is also complicated and costly,” noted Tse. QFIIs were reluctant to change their brokers unless it was essential. For example, CITI changed their broker to Orient Securities because they were about to form a joint

venture with the broker outfit in June 2011. The Circular allows QFIIs to transfer their funds more easily and trade with brokers that are more reliable, as well as switching between brokers when buying or transferring funds. Competition is also expected between securities dealers, as they no longer have a monopoly over investors. Article 9 of the Provisions increases investments in listed companies, as QFIIs can now hold up to a 30% stake, up from the previous 20% cap. “This will encourage foreign investors as they can get more involved and take larger stakes in listed companies. At the same time the local market would gain more liquidity from this increase,” said Tse.

新聞分析

私募股權

Interview | 專訪

Why PE will rise again | 私募行業在中國為何再度興起 Peter Fuhrman, chairman of China First Capital, talks to David Tring about his company’s disciplined focus, what the IPO freeze means for PE investors and how a ruling from a court in China has removed a layer of safety for PE firms | 中國首創投資有限公司 (China First Capital) 董事長 Peter Fuhrman 與 David Tring 進行了交流，討論了中國首創的關注重點、首次公開募股暫停對私募投資者的意義以及某項中國法院的裁決將如何削弱私募的安全屏障 What is China First Capital? China First Capital is a China-focused international bank. I am its chairman and founder. Establishing in 2008, and now running, China First Capital is the fulfilment of a deeply-held ambition nurtured for over 30 years. I first came to China in 1981, as part of a first intake of American graduate students in China. I left China after school and then built a career in the US and Europe. But, throughout, I never lost sight of the goal to return to China and start a business that would contribute meaningfully and positively to the country’s revival and long-term prosperity. China First Capital maintains a disciplined focus on — and strives for a leadership position in — four distinct business areas: 1. Private placement and equity financing for China’s high growth private entrepreneur-led companies; 2. Private equity Secondaries, buy-side & sell-side representation for acquisitions and early liquidity events; 3. Strategic M&A advisory, both cross-border and domestic transactions; and 4. Restructuring and growth capital financing and advisory for China’s State Owned Enterprises. China First Capital is small by investment banking industry standards. Our transaction volume over the preceding twelve months was around $250 million. But, we aim to punch above our weight. China First Capital’s geographical reach and client mandates are across all regions of China, with exceptional proprietary deal flow. We have significant domain expertise in most major industries in China’s private and public sector, structuring transactions for a diversified group of companies and financial sponsors to help them grow and globalise. We seek to be a knowledge-driven company, committed to the

long-term economic prosperity of Chinese business and society, backed by proprietary research (in both Chinese and English), that is generally unmatched by other boutique investment banks or advisory firms active in China. What have been some of the legislative changes to the PE sector this year that are affecting you? The recent policy and legislative changes are mainly no more than tweaks. There has been some sparring within China over which regulator would oversee private equity. But, overall, the PE industry in China is both lightly and effectively regulated. A key change, however, occurred through the legal system within China, when a court in Western China invalidated the put clause of a PE deal done within China, ruling that the PE firm involved had ignored China’s securities laws in crafting this escape mechanism for their investment. While the court ruled on only a single example, the logic applied in this case seems to me, and many others, to be both persuasive and potentially broad-reaching. For PE firms that traditionally added this put clause to all contracts they signed to invest in Chinese companies, and came to rely on it as a way to compel the company to buy them out after a number of years if no IPO took place, there is now real doubt about whether a put clause is worth the paper it’s printed on. Simply put, for PE firms, it means their life-raft here in China has perhaps sprung a leak. What are some of the hottest sectors in China that are attracting PE investors? With IPOs suspended within China and Chinese private companies decidedly unwelcome in the capital markets that once embraced them by the truckload – the US and Hong Kong – there are no hot sectors for PE investment in China now. The PE industry in

The PE industry has never seen anything quite like what is “happening now in China ”

| 私募行業從未出現過中國正經歷的

情況

China, once high-flying, is now decidedly grounded and covered in tarpaulin. What is perhaps most unfortunate about this is that what we are seeing mainly is a crisis within China’s PE industry, not within the ranks of China’s very dynamic private entrepreneurial economy. In other words, while financing has all but dried up, China’s private companies continue, in many cases, to excel and outperform those everywhere else in the world. The PE firms made a fundamental miscalculation by pouring money into too many deals where their only method of exit, of getting their money back with a profit, was through an IPO. By our count, there are now over 7,500 PE-invested deals in China all awaiting exit, at a time when few, if any exits are occurring. Since PE firms themselves have a finite life in almost all cases, this means over $100bn in capital is now stuck inside deals with no high-probability way to exit before the PE funds themselves reach their planned expiry. The PE industry has never seen anything quite like what is happening now in China. What is a typical day like for you at China First Capital? We are lucky to work for an outstanding group of companies, mainly all Chinese domestic. Indeed, I am the only non-Chinese thing about the business. I am in China doing absolutely what I love doing. There are no aspects of my working day that I find tedious or unpleasant. Even at my busiest, I am aware I am at most a few hours away from the next in an endless series of totally delicious Chinese meals. That alone has a levitating effect on my spirit. But, the real source of pleasure and purpose is in befriending and working beside entrepreneurs in China who are infinitely more skilled, more driven and wiser to the ways of the world and more successful than I ever could hope to be. We are quite busy now working for one of China’s largest SOEs. It’s something of a departure for us, since most of our work is with private sector companies. But, this is a fascinating transaction that provides me with a quite privileged insider’s view of the way a large state-owned business operates here in China, the additional layers of decision-making and the unique environment that places far greater onus on increasing revenues than profits.

中國法律商務2013年回顧

Private Equity

What do you find are some of the major issues or concerns for foreign PE clients when doing deals in China? All investors looking to make money in China, whether on the stock market or through private equity and venture capital, must confront the same huge uncertainty – not that China itself will stop its remarkable economic transformation and stop growing at levels that leave the rest of the developed world behind in the dust. This growth I believe will continue for at least the next 20 years. The big unknown has to do with the actual situation inside the Chinese company you are buying into. Can the financial statements and Big Four audits be relied on? Are the actual profits what the company asserts them to be? How great is the risk that investors’ money will disappear down some unseen rat hole? Some frightening stories have come to light in the last two years. How widespread is the problem of accounting fraud in China? Part of the problem really is just the law of big numbers. With a population almost triple that of the US and Western Europe combined, China has a lot of everything, including both remarkable businesses run by individuals who are the entrepreneurial equal of Henry Ford and Steve Jobs, and well as some shady operators. What is your outlook for China’s PE sector in the coming 12 months? I believe the current crisis will abate, and stock markets will once again allow Chinese private sector companies to do IPOs. The IPOs will be far fewer in number than in 2010, but still the revival of IPO exits will also thaw the current deep-freeze that has shut down most PE activity across China. PE firms will again start to invest, and put a dent in the $30 billion or more in capital they have raised to invest in China but have left untouched. The PE industry in China, since its founding a little more than a decade ago, grew enormously large but never really matured. There are now too many PE firms. By some count, the number exceeds 1,000, including hundreds of renminbi PE firms started and run by people with no real experience investing in private companies. Their future appears dire. At the same time, the global PE firms that bestride the industry, including Carlyle, Blackstone, TPG, KKR, have yet to fully establish they can operate as efficiently and profitably in China as they do in Europe and the US. While the China PE industry struggles to recover from many self-inflicted wounds, China’s private sector companies will continue to find and exploit huge opportunities for growth and profit in China, as the nation’s one billion consumers grow ever-richer and ever more demanding. 介紹一下中國首創？首創投資是一家專注於服務中國的國際投資銀行。我是該公司的董事長和創始人。中國首創從 2008 年發展至今，實現了我 30 多年來深植心底的雄心壯志。1981 年，我作為到中國學習的首批美國研究生中的一員首次來到中國。畢業後我離開了中國，然後在美國和歐洲展開了職業生涯。但是，自始至終，我從未忘

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

News analysis

記自己的目標：返回中國並創立一番真正有益於中國經濟復蘇和長期繁榮的事業。中國首創一直密切關注以下四個不同的業務領域，並在這些領域中爭取領先地位： 1. 為中國高增長私有企業提供股權融資的私募資金； 2. 私募股權代理人，兼並活動及企業早期融資中買賣雙方的代理人； 3. 針對跨國和國內交易提供戰略並購咨詢；以及 4. 為中國國有企業提供結構重組和增資融資的咨詢。按照投資銀行行業標準來說，中國首創屬於小型銀行。我們過去十二個月的交易額約為 2.5 億美元。但是，我們會一直努力超越自己。中國首創區域分布和客戶服務範圍覆蓋整個中國，擁有特殊專有項目來源。我們涉獵面廣、專業、涵蓋中國私營和公有的大多數行業，為各種公司和投資人構建交易以助其發展和實現全球化。我們致力於成為知識驅動型公司，努力推動中國商業和社會的長期經濟繁榮，並以市場研究（不論是中文還是英文）為支持，這些是在中國發展的其他小型專業銀行或咨詢公司無法比擬的。今年哪些針對私募行業的法規變化對您有所影響？近期主要對政策和法規進行了微調。對於監督私募股權的監管機構，中國國內一直存在爭論。但是，總的來說，中國的私募行業得到了寬松有效的監管。然而，中國西部某法院判定在中國境內完成的一項私募股權交易條款中的就私募資金的退出機制無效，並裁定相關私募股權公司為其投資起草退出機制時忽視了中國證券法，這意味著中國的法律制度出現了重大變化。儘管裁決僅針對單個案例，但此案例中應用的規則對我和很多人來說都很有說服力並可能影響深遠。很多私募公司在中國投資時，通常會在所有合同上添加此類退出機制的條款，並以此為依據在多年未進行首次公開募股的情況下迫使公司購買股份，現在應好好考慮是否值得添加回售條款了。簡而言之，對於私募股權公司來說，這意味著他們在中國已不能高枕無憂。在中國，最吸引私募投資者的領域有哪些？隨著首次公開募股(IPO)在中國暫停，同時中國私有企業在曾經備受歡迎的資本市場（例如美國和中國香港）中也逐漸受到冷落，現在中國已不存在私募投資的熱門領域了。中國的私募股權行業曾經發展飛速，但現在已明顯放緩並受到阻礙。最不幸的是，是私募行業裡出現了危機，並不是中國極具活力的私有企業經濟發生了危機。換句話說，雖然融資市場已經枯竭，但在很多情況下，中國的私有企業仍將繼續超越世界各地的同類型公司。私募公司犯了基本的錯誤，過多地將資金投入到那些只能通過上市而退出項目並收回利潤的交易。根據我們的計算，目前中國有 7,500 多項私募投資在等待退出，而真正能夠按計劃退出的公司少之又少。由於在大部分情況下私募公司自身經營時間有限，這意味著 1,000 多億美元的資金現在都滯留在交易中，在計劃期滿前退出的可能性極小。私募行業在國外從未出現過中國正經歷的情況。

您在中國首創的工作是怎樣的？能為優秀的公司（主要是中國國內公司）工作，我們感到非常榮幸。事實上，我自己是這份工作中唯一的“非中國元素”。我在中國做著我熱愛的工作。工作從未讓我覺得乏味或不愉快。甚至在我最忙的時候，我會想到幾小時後就能享受各種中國美味。光這一點就能讓我精神振奮。但是，中國有許多遠比我想象得更專業、更積極、更明智和更成功的企業家，與他們進行交流與合作才是我真正的快樂來源和目標所在。我們現在正忙於為中國最大的國有企業之一提供服務。由於我們大多數工作是面向私營企業的，所以這對我們來說是全新的體驗。但是，這次令人激動的交易讓我有機會從內部瞭解中國大型國有企業的運作方式、決策制定的其他層面以及中國企業重視營收的增加而不僅僅是看利潤。您認為外國私募客戶在中國從事交易時的主要關注點有哪些？所有想在中國賺錢（無論是在股票市場還是通過私募、風險投資）的投資者都必須面對同樣巨大的不確定性 - 中國本身不會停止飛速的經濟轉型。我認為這樣的發展至少還會持續 20 年。這種巨大的不確定性與投資者買入的中國公司的內部實際情況有關。能否依賴財務報表和四大會計師事務所的審計結果？公司的實際利潤真如他們所說的那樣嗎？投資者的資金消失在無底洞的風險有多大？過去兩年中發生了一些令人擔憂的事。中國會計欺詐的問題有多普遍？出現這個問題的一部分原因是人口基數過大。中國的人口是美國和西歐人口總數的近三倍，魚龍混雜，既有如 Henry Ford 和 Steve Jobs 一樣的企業家運營的優秀企業，也存在一些不正當經營者。您認為中國的私募行業在未來一年中前景如何？我認為當前的危機將會減弱，股票市場將會再次讓中國私營企業進行首次公開募股。雖然首次公開募股數量將遠少於 2010 年，但允許私募通過首次公開募股退出後，當前中國大部分私募活動停止的局面將得到緩解。私募公司將重新開始投資，並將削減曾經籌集用於在中國投資但未作處理的 300 億美元或更多資金。中國的私募行業自十多年前成型以來已發展壯大，但從未真正成熟。現在有太多私募公司了。一些數據表明，現在已有超過 1,000 家私募股權公司，包括數百個由不具備投資私有企業實際經驗的人士創辦和運營的人民幣私募股權公司。它們的未來岌岌可危。與此同時，跨行業的全球私募股權公司（包括 Carlyle、Blackstone、TPG、KKR）尚未在中國達到其與在歐洲和美國一樣的高效地運作。雖然中國的私募行業正努力從很多自身造成的創傷中恢復，但因為中國的十億消費者會越來越富，需求也會不斷增長，所以中國的私營企業可繼續尋找並利用國內的巨大發展和利潤機會。

私募股權 INDIA

新聞分析

In addition, the CSRC is expanding the channels open to investors. Under Article 8, they are now permitted to invest in the interbank bond market and private placement bonds issued by small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). SMEs have been struggling this year, with difficulty in raising money and launching initial public offerings (IPOs). “Not every SME in China is able to secure bank loans or private equity investments, so private placement would provide them with another channel for much needed fundraising,” commented Tse. In April this year, the CSRC also raised the quota for QFIIs from $30 billion to $80 billion. The Commission has also increased the speed at which it approves investments and is granting more licences. Combined with the new Provisions, these are all strong signs the country is committed to opening up its capital markets. 《合格境外機構投資者境內證券投資管理辦法的相關問題的規定》由中國證券監督委員會（以下簡稱“證監會”）於 2012年7 月 27 日發佈並於同日生效。本規定加強了監管力度，旨在吸引更多境外機構資金長期注入中國資本市場。“證監會的目標是加快跨境資金流動並進一步向境外投資者開放國內金融市場，”邦信陽律師事務所上海的合伙

This will “encourage foreign investors as they can get more involved and take larger stakes in listed companies | 這將鼓舞境外投資者，因為

他們可以更多參與上市公司的事務並持有更大比例的股份

”

Hubert Tse, Boss & Young, Shanghai 謝鴻銘, 邦信陽, 上海

人，也是為在華合格境外機構投資者 (QFII) 提供過法律服務的謝鴻銘律師說道。本規定的第 13 條允許 QFII 選擇多家證券交易商。所有 QFII 都可以選擇三家國內註冊的證券公司在上海證券交易所和深圳證券交易所進行證券交易，這一規定尚屬首次。 “從前，QFII 只能選用一個證券經紀，一旦他們與經紀出現糾紛，便難以靈活地換掉，且代價很高，過程也很複雜，”謝鴻銘說。除非確有必要，否則 QFII 不會輕易更

換證券經紀。例如，花旗集團將其證券經紀換為東方證券是因為其計劃在 2011 年 6 月與代理機構成立合資企業。此通知出台後，QFII 可以更輕鬆地轉移資金並選更可靠的經紀進行交易，還可以在購買或轉移資金時更換經紀行。同時也鼓勵各證券交易商之間展開競爭，因為誰都無法再壟斷投資者資源。本規定的第 9 條提高了 QFII 對上市公司的投資上限，最高控股比例從之前的 20% 提高到現在的 30%。 “這將鼓舞境外投資者，因為他們可以更多參與上市公司的事務並持有更大比例的股份。與此同時，隨著投資金額的增加，當地市場將獲得更多的流動資金，”謝鴻銘說。另外，證監會正在不斷擴大向投資者開放的渠道。根據第 8 條規定，投資者現在可以投資銀行間債券市場和中小型企業 (SME) 發行的私募債券。今年中小型企業舉步維艱，在籌集資金和啟動首次公開募股 (IPO) 方面困難重重。“在中國，並不是每一個中小型企業都能獲得銀行貸款或私募股權投資，因此他們可以利用私募配售籌措到急需款項，”謝鴻銘解釋說。今年四月，證監員會還將 QFII 的投資額度從 300 億美元增加至 800 億美元。證監會還加快了批准投資的速度併發放了更多許可證。再加上新出台的本規定，這一切都明確顯示了中國正致力於開放資本市場。

Private equity enters the T insurance market | 私募進入中國保險市場 A new Circular from the CIRC finally opens up the insurance market to private equity investments. Firms need to consider the eligibility requirements and understand that they cannot interfere in the daily management of insurance companies | 中國保險監督管理委員會新出台的一項通知最終為私募投資打開了保險市場的大門。各公司需要考慮相關資格要求，並應明確其無權干涉保險公司的日常管理

he China Insurance Regulatory Commission (CIRC) released the Circular on Issues Relevant to Regulating the Equity Investment in Insurance Companies by Equity Investment Enterprises in the Form of Limited Partnerships (中國保監會關於規範有限合伙式股權投資企業投資入股保險公司有關問題的通知) on April 24 2013. The Circular is a response to the Implementing Opinions on Encouraging and Supporting the Healthy Development of Private Investment (中國保監會關於鼓勵和支持民間投資健康發展的實施意見) released by the CIRC in June last year. The Circular expands on the Opinion and facilitates private equity (PE) investors to enter the insurance market. Investing in this market

中國法律商務2013年回顧

Private Equity

Leading Private Equity lawyers Heiner Braun, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer Geoffrey Chan, Ropes & Gray Jeffrey Ding, Fangda Partners John Du, Jun He William Hua, King & Wood Mallesons (see biography p.82) Jack Lai, Zhong Lun Law Firm Li Shoushuang, Dacheng Law Offices Charles Li, Han Kun Law Offices Greg Liu, Paul Weiss Rifkind Wharton & Garrison Gregory Miao, Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom Filip Moerman, Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton Arthur Mok, Ropes & Gray Ben Qi Bin, Jin Mao Partners Binxue Sang, Jun He Edward Sun, Milbank Tweed Hadley & McCloy Peng Tan, Fangda Partners Walker J Wallace, O’Melveny & Myers Alan Wang, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer David Wang, Paul Hastings Janofsky & Walker Howard Wu, Baker & McKenzie Xiao Hongming, Guantao Law Firm Yong Xie, Jin Mao Partners Yang Jingfang, Haiwen & Partners Howard Zhang, Davis Polk & Wardwell Norman Zhang, Fangda Partners Zhang Yi, King & Wood Mallesons Anthony Zhao, Zhong Lun Law Firm David Zou, Boss & Young

Source: Asialaw Leading Lawyers 2013

requires large capital with extended investment time frames, which means that private investors have been rare in the past. Typically, foreign financial institutions and PRC investors from other financial sectors like banks dominated investments in the insurance market. However, as initial public offerings (IPOs) and M&A in the insurance market have become more active, it is attracting private investors. “Many PE outfits are excited about this Circular. In the past, PE investors treated the insurance market as a restricted field, but now PE will become more active in the insurance

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

News analysis

market,” said Zhan Hao, a founding partner of AnJie Law Firm in Beijing. There are only five insurance companies listed in the PRC; Ping An, PICC, China Life, China Pacific and China New Life. This means there are around 160 insurance companies waiting to be listed. In addition, insurance agencies, brokerage companies, loss adjuster companies, insurance fund management companies and reinsurance companies would bring that number to well over 1,000. Private equity investors can also bring their financing, taxation and investment knowhow to insurance companies under the new Circular. It is hoped this will prove a valuable commodity for the insurance industry.

Eligibility requirements The Circular lays out certain requirements for a limited partnership equity investment enterprise to invest in an insurance company: To make investment in an insurance company, a limited partnership equity investment enterprise shall comply with the following requirements: • The insurance company to be invested shall have a controlling shareholder or actual controller, a reasonable equity structure and sound and stable corporate governance; • The limited partnership equity investment enterprise shall truthfully disclose the sources of funding and the background of its partners, including their names, nationalities, business scope or occupations and contribution amount; • The general partner responsible for executing the affairs of the limited partnership enterprise shall have favorable integrity and tax payment records, have no record of major illegalities and irregularities, undertake that the sources of funding are not in violation of the provisions on anti-money laundering and bear corresponding liabilities for the investment in the insurance company by the equity investment enterprise; • A single limited partnership equity investment enterprise shall not contribute more

than 5% of the total capital of a single insurance company or hold more than 5% of its shares; and the total capital contribution made to a single insurance company, or the total number of shares held in a single insurance company, by all investing limited partnership equity investment enterprises shall not exceed 15%; • The limited partnership equity investment enterprise may not become the largest shareholder of the insurance company, may not become its controlling shareholder or actual controller, or may not participate in the operation and management of the insurance company; • Where the limited partnership equity investment enterprise has an existence

新聞分析

period, it shall transfer all held equity of the insurance company before the expiration of the existence period; and • The limited partnership equity investment enterprise shall satisfy other conditions prescribed by the CIRC. “It is certain that private equity enterprises will take to investing in insurance companies. This is a big development for the market,” said Zhan. To make investments into insurance companies, private equity enterprises have to submit their applications in writing to the CIRC. These include the audited financial and accounting reports of the previous year and tax payment record of the past three years.

In order to control risk, the CIRC has limited the role of PE funds by barring them from participating in the daily management of the insurance companies they invest in. This is further seen in the fact that each partnership PE fund can hold no more than 5% of an insurance company, and their combined shareholding in the insurer must not exceed 15%.

中

國保險監督管理委員會（CIRC，以下簡稱“保監會”）於 2013 年 4 月 24 日發佈了《關於規範有限合伙式股權投資企業投資入股保險公司相關問題的通知》。此通知響應了保監會於2012年 6 月發佈的《關於鼓勵和支持民間投資健康發展的實施意見》。此通知在該實施意見的基礎上進行了擴展，促進私募股權 (PE) 投資者進入保險市場。投資這一市場不僅需要大量資金，還需制定長期投資時間框架，因此在過去罕有私募投資者涉足這一領域。通常情況下，保險市場的投資主要來源於境外金融機構以及來自其他財政部門（如銀行）的境內投資者。但是，隨著首次公開募股 (IPO) 和兼並在保險市場的發展越發積極，私募基金的投資者也開始動心。 “此通知使很多私募機構振奮不已。過去，私募股權投資者視保險市場如禁地，但如今，私募在中國保險市場上開始大行其道，”安傑律師事務所北京辦公室的創始合伙人詹昊說。中國境內已經上市的保險公司只有五家，分別是中國平安保險、中國人民財產保險、中國人壽保險、中國太平洋保險和新華人壽保險。這意味著，還有約 160 家保險公司等待上市。如果再加上保險代理機構、經紀公司、理賠公司、保險基金管理公司和再保險公司，這一數字將遠遠超過 1,000家。根據新出台的通知，私募投資者還可以將他們的融資、稅制及投資知識一並引入保險公司。我們希望，這將是促進保險業蓬勃發展的千金妙方。資格此通知針對有限合伙股權投資企業投資保險公司設定了若干要求：

私募股權 INDIA

要投資保險公司，有限合伙股權投資企業應遵守以下要求： • 被投資的保險公司應擁有控股股東或實際控制人、合理的股權結構以及合理且穩定的公司管治； • 有限合伙股權投資企業應如實公開其資金來源及合伙人背景資料，包括姓名、國籍、業務範圍或職位以及投資數額； • 負責執行有限合伙企業各項事務的普通合伙人應誠實守信、具有良好的納稅記錄、無重大違法違規記錄，保證資金來源符合有關反洗錢的規定，並對股權投資企業投資保險公司的行為承擔相應責任； • 單個有限合伙股權投資企業對單個保險公司投入的資金或持有的股份不得超過該保險公司總資本或總股份的 5%；且所有的有限合伙股權投資企業對同一家保險公司投入的總資金或持有的總股份之和不得超過該保險公司全部資本或股份的 15%； • 有限合伙股權投資企業不得成為被投資保險公司的最大股東、控股股東或實際控制人，也不得參與該保險公司的運營和管理； • 有限合伙股權投資企業具有一定的存在期限的話，其應在期限終止前轉讓所持有的該保險公司的全部股權；以及 • 有限合伙股權投資企業應符合保監會規定的其他條件。 “毫無疑問，私募股權企業即將開始投資保險公司。這對保險市場而言是個巨大的發展，”詹昊說。要對保險公司進行投資，私募股權企業必須向保監會提交書面申請，其中包括上一年的審計財務報表和會計報表以及過去三年的納稅記錄。為了控制風險，保監會禁止私募股權企業參與被投資保險公司的日常管理工作，以此限制私募股權基金的角色作用。此外，保監會規定每個合伙私募股權企業所持股份不得超過被投資保險公司總股份的 5%，且所有合伙私募股權企業所持股份之和不得超過該保險公司總股份的 15%，進一步顯示了限制私募股權基金的目的。

中國法律商務2013年回顧

News analysis

Private Equity

William HUA (華雷)

King & Wood Mallesons 20th Floor, East Tower, World Financial Centre, 1 Dongsanhuan Zhonglun Chaoyang District, Beijing 100020, P R China Tel: +86 10 5878 5098 Fax: +86 10 5878 5566 Email: hualei@cn.kwm.com Website: www.kwm.com

William Hua is a partner of King & Wood Mallesons and managing partner of KWM’s Tianjin Office. He specialises in Private Equity and Venture Capital, Securities and Capital Markets, FDI, Mergers and Acquisitions and Dispute Resolution. In over 20 years of legal practice, Mr Hua has participated in dozens of transactions involving foreign direct investment, mergers and acquisitions, corporate restructurings and domestic and overseas IPOs. Mr Hua has extensive experience and a prominent track record in the area of private equity and venture capital. He has provided a variety of innovative services for domestic and foreign distinguished PE funds’ formation and subsequent investments as well as IPOs. He has published the book “Hot Issues in Private Equity – Rules and Practice” and has been nominated as leading lawyer in China by China Law & Practice. Mr Hua obtained his LLB from the China University of Political Science and Law, and his LLM from the Southwest University of Political Science and Law. He received his second LLM from the University of Cambridge Faculty of Law (Trinity Hall). He was awarded a certificate for the Real Estate Financing Program in Columbia University in the City of New York. Mr Hua is a member of Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, an arbitrator of China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC). He is proficient in Chinese and English. 華雷律師為北京金杜律師事務所合伙人兼天津分所主任，主要從事私募投資和風險資本、外商直接投資、證券與資本市場、兼並與收購、爭議解決等業務，迄今已有20多年的執業經驗。曾主辦過眾多外商投資與並購項目，為境內外著名私募基金的設立、投資及上市提供創造性法律服務，被《China Law & Practice》評為中國領先律師。曾出版專著《私募股權基金前沿問題—制度與實踐》。他先後畢業於中國政法大學及西南政法大學，分獲法學學士和法學碩士學位；後深造於英國劍橋大學法律系並獲法學碩士學位。現為英國皇家特許仲裁員協會會員，中國國際經濟貿易仲裁委員會仲裁員。

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

觀察

私募股權

Looking for the exit Hu Yijin of Jun He Law Offices summarises the latest developments in private equity and analyses the implications of the IPO slowdown

1. a) What have been the key legislative developments affecting the private equity market in the past 12 months? The main legislative developments include the amendment of the Securities Investment Fund Law and the issuance of the Circular on the Division of Responsibilities for the Administration of Private Equity Funds. n

On December 28 2012, the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress amended the Securities Investment Fund Law, including the engagement in the private raising of proceeds for securities investment within the scope of revision for the first time, so as to regulate their offering and operation. The law sets forth provisions of principle for the investment operation of privately offered funds, specifies the system for the registration of fund managers, establishes a qualified investor system, requires postoffering reporting of privately offered funds as the registration procedure and prohibits the carrying out of open publicity and promotion for privately offered funds. n On June 27 2013, the State Commission Office for Public Sector Reform issued the Circular on the Division of Responsibilities for the Administration of Private Equity Funds, specifying that the CSRC is charged with the regulation of private equity funds and the NDRC is charged with arranging for the drafting of policies and measures to promote the development of private equity funds.

b) Do you expect any PE-related laws to be drafted or released in the next 12 months? During the next few months we expect that the CSRC and NDRC will issue measures specifically for the administration of the private equity fund sector, to formally place private securities investment funds and private equity funds into a uniform regulatory framework, and set forth more detailed provisions governing their establishment and operation.

2. What are the hottest sectors in China that are attracting PE investors? Looking at the distribution of recent PE investment projects in China, what has currently been most attractive to PE investors are enterprises that are in compliance with the development direction for the state’s strategic new sectors. These include: enterprises in sectors such as alternative energy, new materials, information, biological and new pharmaceuticals, energy saving, environmental protection and hi-tech services, as well as enterprises in consumer product industries that are closely related to the livelihoods of ordinary Chinese people.

With the rapid development of a greying society in China and the increasing demand for quality medical services, the medical and health industries are increasingly drawing the attention of PE 中國法律商務2013年回顧

Private Equity

Insights

With the rapid development of a greying society in China and the increasing demand for quality medical services, the medical and health industries are increasingly drawing the attention of PE.

3. Why is there such a huge backlog of companies waiting for IPOs? How long has the moratorium been in place? What effect has this had on PE and when do you expect IPOs to be allowed again? The main reasons for the backlog in the stock market are, on the one hand, the relatively strong desire on the part of enterprises to list due to the limited financing channels available to them in China; and, on the other hand, the damping down of the IPO rhythm by regulators due to poor sentiment in the stock market and the recently exposed scandals involving listed companies that have fiddled their finances, or whose performance has done a 180° turn after listing, as well as the regulators’ extensive verifications of companies intending to list. These factors have resulted in a difficult situation where a large number of enterprises have poured into the IPO channel without, however, being able to offer shares. Since the listing of Zhejiang Shibao Company Limited on November 2 2012, it has been more than eight months since the last IPO on the A-share market. The limited channels and means presently available to PE investors to exit from their investments, the moratorium on IPOs and the continuously increasing number of enterprises lining up to apply points to longer waiting periods for PE divestment and greater uncertainty as to whether divestment can be achieved through an IPO. Developments such as the replacement of the CSRC chairman and the reform of the new share offer mechanism make it difficult to predict exactly when IPOs will restart. However, with the completion of the first round of financial verifications by the CSRC, we believe that the signals for the restarting of IPOs are getting stronger.

4. IPOs are the main exit route for PE investors in China. As there is a moratorium on IPOs, what other exit routes are there? Given that it is becoming more difficult for PE to exit via an A-share IPO, and that returns have declined, M&A will become the future substitute option for PE divestment. Furthermore, in September 2012, the curtain was formally raised on expansion of what is called the “new third board”, making an exit through the “new third board” another substitute option for quite a few PE investors; the principal means of exit for PE on the “new third board” at present are equity transfers and re-directed IPOs effected through the “new third board” to realise an exit by listing on a different board. Additionally, listing in Hong Kong, Taiwan or the US or a buyback by the investee company or a major shareholder are other substitute exit routes available to PE investors.

Developments such as the replacement of the CSRC chairman and the reform of the new share offer mechanism make it difficult to predict exactly when IPOs will restart

(1) the scope of the industries of the available investment projects is much wider; and (2) under the current foreign exchange control environment operating in China, the investment and exit mechanisms for Rmb funds are much more flexible. However, Rmb funds also suffer from weaknesses such as a comparatively short history, insufficient experience and insufficiently sound incentive mechanisms. We believe that, in the next few years, with the legally compliant development of the PE industry, Rmb funds will maintain their growth trends in terms of the number established and the amount of offer proceeds, and will become more and more competitive. Additionally, with the state’s gradual relaxation of its policy of controlling the establishment of equity enterprises in China by foreign investors, Rmb funds and US dollar funds, while competing, will have more opportunities to cooperate and achieve win-win situations.

6. CSRC chairman Guo Shuqing stepped down earlier this year after only 18 months in his role. Guo was known as a reformer in the market. What were some of his achievements and what is still left to be done? During his time as chairman of the CSRC, Guo Shuqing carried out a number of reforms, the principal ones being the new policy setting minimum dividends for listed companies, the introduction of longterm money, such as RQFII, the establishment of the A-share delisting system, the crack down on insider trading, the disclosure of the IPO review procedure and the financial verifications which commenced at the end of 2012. These measures raised the quality of listed companies and cleaned up the capital market environment, but some of the reform measures still require further testing or implementation – for example: how to attract stable long-term funds and establish complementary rules, how to genuinely implement the A-share delisting system, how to change the public’s impression of China’s stock markets as what are known as appropriation markets and change speculation to investment. These are all problems that the new chairman, Xiao Gang, will have to face. Among these, perhaps the most pressing problem is how to smoothly restart IPOs and effectively clear the IPO backlog.

5. What is your outlook on the rise of domestic Rmb funds?

7. What new opportunities are available for foreign investments in renminbi funds and for offshore investment of China funds?

Compared to US dollar funds with foreign investment structures, Rmb funds have the following advantages when invested in in China:

For foreign investors, the ways to enter the domestic fund sector at present are foreign-invested venture capital enterprises, equity

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

觀察

Author biography Hu Yijin Hu got his LLB from the Law Department of Nankai University in 2000 and LLM from the School of Law of Tsinghua University in 2003. He joined Jun He in 2005. Hu is a partner of Jun He Law Offices and currently practises at the Shenzhen office. Since joining Jun He, Hu has represented more than ten companies in their successful IPOs, and issuances of shares and bonds. He has also helped many funds in their establishment and investment. Hu has provided legal services for many companies in their restructuring, M&A and employee incentive plans. He also serves as counsel to some listed companies in information disclosure matters and general corporate matters.

joint venture funds and region-specific QFLP. The state is currently improving the rules and regulations that govern investment in domestic funds by foreign investors so as to further guide and encourage investment in domestic funds by foreign investors. As for offshore investment of China funds, we believe that, in addition to the existing QDII policies, opportunities exist in the following aspects: firstly, the state has made clear the catalogue for guiding investment in industry offshore; secondly, the state has simplified the overall examination and approval procedures for offshore investment in terms of the approval of offshore investment, foreign exchange control; additionally, China has an increasing number of outstanding financial intermediaries familiar with offshore markets that can effectively assist investors in rapidly understanding local culture and laws, mitigating information asymmetry and reducing investment times and costs, thereby giving investors more opportunities than were available to them before to understand the actual circumstances of the companies they are investing in so that they can make their investments more effectively and safely.

8. Are there any tax updates that PE firms or funds should be aware of? The one relatively major change in taxation recently has been the expansion of the scope of the pilot projects for levying value-added tax instead of business tax. On July 31 2012, the State Administration of Taxation issued the Circular on the Launch of Pilot Projects for the Levy of Value-added Tax in Place of Business Tax in the Transport Industry and Certain Modern Service Industries in Eight Provinces and Municipalities including Beijing that expanded the scope of the pilot projects for levying value-added tax instead of business tax from Shanghai to eight other provinces and municipalities including Beijing and Guangdong. Pursuant to a decision taken at an executive meeting of the State Council in April 2013, the business tax to VAT pilot projects for the transport industry and certain modern service businesses will be further expanded, and beginning on August 1 2013, the pilot projects will be implemented nationwide and the scope of industries covered will be

私募股權

gradually expanded. The implementation of business tax to VAT will, on the whole, reduce the tax burden on enterprises.

9. What are some of the major issues or concerns foreign PE clients might have in doing deals in China? Recent changes that need to be paid attention to include: n

Preferential policies for the registration of regional PE institutions: in addition to the QLFP policies in regions such as Shanghai and Beijing, regions approved by the State Council such as Qianhai in Shenzhen and Hengqin in Zhuhai have established special preferential policies in terms of taxation, etc. in respect of the registration of PE institutions. n Validity of VIE structures: in 2012, the Shanghai Commission of the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission rendered an award in a case finding that a VIE agreement was invalid on the grounds that it took “a lawful form hiding an illegal objective” and that it “violated mandatory provisions of state administrative regulations”; this has given rise to a general malaise among domestic and foreign investment institutions as to the legality and stability of VIE structures. n Validity of valuation adjustment mechanisms: in a retrial judgment rendered at the beginning of 2013, the Supreme People’s Court clarified the validity of valuation adjustment agreements, namely that valuation adjustment mechanisms between an investor and a company are invalid but that such mechanisms between an investor and a shareholder of the company are valid. Although China is not a case law country, the case has nonetheless triggered a great deal of debate and given domestic and foreign investment institutions a better understanding of the validity of valuation adjustment mechanisms.

10. The CSRC has taken an active role in clamping down on insider trading and accounting irregularities – how has this affected the PE market? In the short term, the investment benefits of certain PE institutions will suffer and the investment costs and operating costs of certain PE institutions may increase as the clampdown may affect the IPO schedules of their investee enterprises or the acquisition transaction procedures. However, in the long term, only a healthy market environment can offer the PE industry better growth and more business opportunities; this process is also conducive to promoting the transition from a situation where only one exit route – an IPO – is available to PE in China to one where multiple routes, including M&A, restructuring and buyback are available. Furthermore, this process will cause PE institutions to assist their investee enterprises, after the investment, in making their finances and internal controls compliant so as to liberate the enterprises’ potential, thereby leveraging PE institutions’ greater value. In the future, PE institutions will participate more than before in the strategic planning and management of their investee enterprises.

中國法律商務2013年回顧

Private Equity

Insights

尋找出路君合律師事務所的胡義錦律師綜合了私募股權的最新發展，並對IPO暫停的因由作出分析 1. a) 過去12個月，私募股權市場方面有什麼主要的法規出台? 主要的立法包括《證券投資基金法》的修訂和《關于私募股權基金管理職責分工的通知》的印發。 n

2012年12月28日，全國人大常委會對《證券投資基金法》進行了修改，首次將從事證券投資的非公開募集資金納入調整範圍，以規範其募集和運作。該法對非公開募集基金的投資運作進行了原則性規定，規定了基金管理人的注冊和登記制度，確立了合格投資者制度，對非公開募集基金的注冊要求事後報備，並禁止非公開募集基金進行公開性的宣傳和推介等。 n 2013年6月27日，中央機構編制辦公室印發了《關于私募股權基金管理職責分工的通知》，確定由證監會負責私募股權基金的監督管理，由發改委負責組織擬訂促進私募股權基金發展的政策措施。 b) 未來12個月，您預計將有哪些有關私募股權的法規的草擬或出台? 預計未來一段時間內，證監會和發改委可能會就私募基金行業出具專門的管理辦法，正式將私募的證券投資基金和私募股權基金納入統一監管框架，並對其設立、運作等行為進行更加細化的規定。 2. 中國有哪些熱門行業吸引私募股權投資者? 從近期PE在中國的投資項目分布來看，目前最吸引PE投資者的是符合國家戰略性新興產業發展方向的企業，如新能源、新材料、信息、生物與新醫藥、節能環保、高技術服務等領域的企業，以及與居民生活相關的消費品行業企業。隨着中國老齡化社會的日益臨近以及居民對高品質醫療服務的日益追求，醫療健康行業也越來越受到PE的青睞。 3. 為什麼累積了這麼多公司等待IPO？IPO暫停了多長時間？這對私募股權投資有什麼影響？您預計IPO什麼時候重新啟動? 造成目前股市“堰塞湖”的主要原因，一方面是由于境內企業融資渠道較少，企業擁有較高的上市熱情；另一方面，由于股市行情低迷和近期爆發的上市公司財務造假或業績變臉等醜聞，監管機構將IPO節奏放緩，同時對擬上市公司進行大規模的核查。以上因素造成了大量企業涌入IPO通道，卻無法得到發行的窘境。自浙江世寶股份有限公司2012年11月2日上市以來，A股市場已經超過8個月沒有發行一支IPO新股。由于目前PE投資者投資退出的渠道和途徑有限，IPO的暫停以及排隊申報企業數量的不斷增加將意味着PE退出時間的延長以及能否成功通過IPO退出的更大

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

隨着中國老齡化社會的日益臨近以及居民對高品質醫療服務的日益追求，醫療健康行業也越來越受到PE的青睞

觀察

作者簡歷胡義錦 (合伙人) 胡義錦律師先後畢業于南開大學法學系和清華大學法學院並于2005年1月加入君合，現在君合深圳分所執業。他的主要業務領域為境內境外上市，基金的設立與投資，公司的收購、重組以及外商直接投資。加入君合以來，胡義錦律師已為數十家公司的境內外上市、增發或發行債券提供法律服務，協助眾多境內外知名企業或基金完成重組和並購，並幫助大量基金完成設立；他還為多家公司的員工激勵提供法律服務並為多家上市公司提供日常法律服務。

不確定性。由于證監會主席更換以及新股發行機制改革等原因，很難準確預期IPO重啟的時間表。但隨着證監會第一輪財務核查的完成，我們認為，IPO重啟的信號已經越來越強。 4. IPO為中國私募股權投資者的主要退出市場渠道。目前 IPO暫停，投資者有哪些其他退出市場的渠道? 鑒于目前PE通過A股IPO方式退出的難度越來越大，且收益也有所下降，並購將是未來PE退出的替代選擇。此外，2012年 9月，新三板擴容正式拉開帷幕，通過新三板實現退出也成為不少PE在IPO之外的另一替代選擇；PE目前在新三板的退出方式主要是股權轉讓，以及經新三板曲線進行IPO，實現轉板上市退出。此外，赴香港、台灣、美國等地上市以及由被投資公司或大股東回購等也是除A股IPO之外PE退出的替代路徑。 5. 面對境內人民幣基金的增長勢頭，您對前景有何看法? 相比外資結構的美元基金，人民幣基金在境內投資時，擁有如下優勢：一是可投資項目的行業範圍更加廣泛；二是在當前境內外匯資本管制環境下，人民幣基金的投入和退出機制都更為靈活。但人民幣基金同時存在歷史較短、經驗不足和激勵機制不夠完善的缺點。我們相信，未來幾年，隨着PE行業的規範發展，人民幣基金都將在成立數量和募集資金數額上保持增長的勢頭，也會越來越有競爭力。同時，隨着國家對外商境內設立股權企業管制政策的逐步放開，人民幣基金和美元基金在競爭的同時也將會有更多的合作和共贏機會。 6. 今年年初，郭樹清擔任中國證監會主席僅18個月便離任。郭被認為是市場的改革者。他建立了什麼功績？還有什麼仍未實行? 郭樹清任證監會主席期間，進行了多項改革，主要包括建立上市公司最低分紅要求新政、引入RQFII等長線資金、建立A 股退市制度，嚴打內幕交易、公示IPO審核流程以及自2012年底開始的財務核查等。這些措施提高了上市公司質量、淨化了資本市場環境，但其中部分改革措施尚待考驗或執行；比如如何引入穩定的長期資金並建立配套細則，如何使A股退市制度真正得到執行，如何改變大眾對中國股市“圈錢市”的

私募股權

固有印象、變投機為投資，這些都是新任主席肖剛需要面對的難題；而其中，最亟需解決的問題也許就是如何平穩地重啟IPO，有效地疏導IPO堰塞。 7. 對于外商投資人民幣基金和中國基金境外投資這兩方面，有什麼新的商機? 對于外國投資者來說，現階段可通過外商投資創投企業、合資基金和限定區域的QFLP等方式進入到境內基金領域。目前國家正在完善外商投資境內基金的法規規章，進一步引導和鼓勵外商投資境內基金。而對于中國基金海外投資，除已有的QDII政策外，我們認為在以下方面還存在機遇：首先，國家明確了境外投資的產業指導目錄；其次，國家已經從境外投資審批、外匯管理等方面降低了境外投資的審批程序和流程；另外，中國已有越來越多的優秀金融中介熟悉境外市場，可以有效幫助投資者迅速瞭解當地的文化及法律、減少信息不對稱、節約投資時間成本等，使得投資者較以前有更多機會瞭解所投資公司的實際情況，更高效安全地完成投資。 8. 有什麼最新的稅務領域變化是私募股權投資公司或基金應注意的呢? 近期比較大的稅務領域變化就是營改增的試點範圍擴大。2012 年7月31日，國稅總局發布了《關于在北京等8省市開展交通運輸業和部分現代服務業營業稅改征增值稅試點的通知》，將營業稅改增值稅的試點範圍擴大到上海以外的北京、廣東等8 個省市。根據國務院常務會議2013年4月的決定，將進一步擴大交通運輸業和部分現代服務業“營改增”試點，2013年8月 1日起試點在全國範圍內推開，並逐步擴大行業試點範圍。營改增的實施整體上將減輕企業的稅務負擔。 9. 外國私募股權投資客戶在中國進行交易，有什麼重要事項需要注意? 近期需要關注的一些變化包括：區域PE機構注冊優惠政策：除上海、北京等區域的QFLP 政策外，國務院批准的深圳前海、珠海橫琴等區域對于PE 機構注冊也在稅收等領域設定了特殊的優惠政策。 n VIE結構的效力：中國國際經濟貿易仲裁委員會上海分會 2012年在一個案例中作出裁決，以“合法形式掩蓋非法目的”及“違反國家行政法規的強制性規定”為由，認定 VIE協議無效；這引起了境內外投資機構對VIE結構合法性和穩定性的普遍擔憂。 n 對賭安排的效力：最高人民法院在2013年年初的一個再審 n

由于證監會主席更換以及新股發行機制改革等原因，很難準確預期IPO重啟的時間表中國法律商務2013年回顧

Private Equity

Insights

判決中明確了對賭協議的效力，即投資人與公司之間的對賭條款無效，但投資人與公司股東之間的對賭條款有效。中國雖然不是判例法國家，但這案例仍引發了廣泛討論，並使得境內外投資機構對對賭安排的效力有了更多的認識。 10. 中國證監會積極打擊內幕交易及會計違規，這對私募股權投資市場有什麼影響? 從短期來看，由于可能影響被投資企業的IPO進程及並購交易

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

流程等，部分PE機構的投資利益將會受到衝擊，部分PE機構的投資成本和運營成本也可能會因此增加。但從長期來看，健康的市場環境才能促使PE行業得到更好的發展和獲得更多的商業機會；這一進程也有助于推進PE在境內的退出渠道從單一IPO過渡到並購、重組、回購等多種方式。此外，這一進程也將促使PE機構在投資後幫助被投資企業規範財務及內控，發掘企業的潛力，從而發揮PE機構的更高價值；PE機構在未來將較之以前更多地參與被投資企業的戰略規劃和管理。

新聞分析

房地產及建築

What the Soho China and Fosun case means for the real estate sector | Soho 中國與復星集團一案對地產業的影響 The case between Soho China and Fosun has shown that the transfer of equity without the consent of subsidiary equity-holders evades the right of first refusal. The Judgment may pose a threat to this practice | Soho 中國與復星集團一案說明，在未得到子公司股權持有者同意的情況下轉讓股權屬於規避子公司股權持有者的優先購買權。本案的判決便是對這一商業慣例的警示

and 8-1 along Shanghai’s famous Bund was the focus for the dispute between Soho China, one of the country’s largest real estate developers and Fosun, one of the largest investment companies. The two companies fought for the development rights of the most expensive piece of land in Shanghai before the Shanghai First Intermediate Court. “The judgment ruled that the transfer of equity in a company without the consent of the company’s subsidiary company’s other equity-holders was considered as circumventing the other equity-holders’ right of first refusal,” said Li Haifeng, a lawyer with Global Law Office in Beijing. The dispute has been a topic of heated debate within the legal and business communities as it has far-reaching consequences for business practices, in particular in the real estate sector.

Case facts The multi-layer equity transactions in the case involved a range of affiliated parties belonging to four independent groups: Soho China, Fosun, Greentown and Zhengda. Project company Zhengda won the development right over Land 8-1 in Shanghai. In April 2010, Fosun, Greentown, Zhengda and another company called Panshi formed a limited liability joint venture (JV), which subsequently took over the development right from the project company. Fosun owned 50%

of the JV and the other three severally the remaining 50%. Later, Panshi was acquired by Zhengda and became a wholly-owned subsidiary of Zhengda. On December 22 2011, Greentown and Zhengda jointly informed Fosun of their intention to transfer their 50% stake in the JV for a price of Rmb4.25 billion ($693 million) and requested Fosun to notify its decision whether to take the transfer before December 28 2011. Fosun did not consent by the deadline. On December 29, Soho China and the respective parent companies of Greentown and Zhengda entered into an acquisition contract whereby Soho China would acquire 100% equity in Greentown and Zhengda for Rmb4 billion. The contract specifically required Greentown and Zhengda to divest their other assets so that the only remaining asset was their equity in the JV. On the same day, Soho China and Greentown publicly disclosed that Soho China would own 50% indirect equity in the JV after the said equity transactions. Fosun then sued Soho China and the other parties involved in the equity transactions, asking for an annulment of the transactions.

The Judgment The Shanghai First Intermediate Court ruled in April 2013 that the series of transactions leading to Soho China obtaining 100% equity in Greentown and Zhengda were

void because they were meant to circumvent Fosun’s right of first refusal. According to Article 72 of the PRC Company Law (中華人民共和國公司法), if an equity-holder in a limited liability company wishes to transfer equity to a party that is not currently an equity holder of the company, it must get the consent of at least half of the other equity-holders. If an equity-holder does not reply within 30 days of receipt of the notice of transfer, it is deemed as consenting. For those consented transfers, the existent equity-holders have the right to take the transfer on the same terms and conditions as offered by outside bidders (right of first refusal). According to Article 52 (3) of the PRC Contract Law (中華人民共和國合同法), “a contract is null if it falls under anyone of the following situations: … (3) pursue illicit purposes under the guise of an apparently licit façade.” The Court held that the right of first refusal is a right provided by the law and hence any act meant to circumvent the right would carry an illicit purpose in the sense of Article 52 (3) of the Contract Law. “The Court found that the series of arrangements of Soho China obtaining 100% equity in Greentown and Zhengda from these companies’ respective parent companies had been conducted with the illicit purpose of circumventing Fosun’s right of first refusal as an existent equity-holder in the JV and

中國法律商務2013年回顧

Real Estate & Construction

Fosun’s such right had indeed been effectively frustrated,” said Li.

Criticism The Judgment has aroused heated debates about its legal correction and possible consequences. The debates focus on whether the circumvention of an equity-holder’s right of first refusal would constitute illicit purpose under Article 52 (3) of the Contract Law. Critics hold the view that the illicit purpose should be confined to violation of public policy or mandatory statutes only and not extended to private rights or interests such as the right of first refusal. Supporters argue that illicit purpose is any purpose that is aiming for a result that runs counter to the purpose of any legal provision be it private or public, discretionary or mandatory. “There is no logic, literary or policy support for the narrow interpretation as held by the critics. Every statutory provision carries a purpose that may allow the concerned parties to derogate from voluntarily, but does not allow acts of non-concerned parties to render it futile,” said Li.

Mitigating risk The Judgement is still subject to appeal before the Shanghai High Court. In the meantime, there are some steps investors can take to mitigate risk. For example, if the controlling equityholder wishes to maintain control in all The Shanghai Court ruled against Soho China stating that the developer circumvented Fosun’s right of first refusal

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

News analysis

situations and avoid a stalemate, it should take a stake higher than 50% in the first place. Also, investors should be extremely cautious when acquiring equity in the holding company whose only asset is equity in an operational company (or another holding company of an operational company) in China, which has other equity-holders.

OHO 中國是中國最大的房地產開發商之一，而復星集團是國內最大的投資公司之一，雙方爭議的焦點就是著名的上海外灘沿線的 8-1 地塊。兩家公司為了爭奪上海最貴地皮的開發權，鬧上了上海第一中級人民法院。 “法院判決裁定，公司股權在未獲得子公司其他股權持有者同意的情況下發生轉讓視為規避其他股權持有者的優先購買權，”環球律師事務所北京辦公室的律師李海峰說。這一爭議對商業慣例尤其是地產業具有深遠的影響，因此已成為法律界和商界的熱點話題。案件事實本案中的多層次股權交易涉及到的若干關聯方屬於以下四個獨立集團：分別是 SOHO 中國、復星集團、綠城集團和證大集團。工程公司證大集團贏得了上海外灘 8-1 地塊的開發權。 2010 年 4 月，復星集團、綠城集團、證大集團和另一家名為磐石投資組成了一家有限責任合資企業，

該合資企業最終從工程公司手中奪得了該地塊的開發權。復星集團擁有該合資企業的 50% 股權，其他三家公司各自擁有剩餘 50% 股權中的一部分。後來，磐石投資被證大集團收購，成為證大集團的全資子公司。 2011 年 12 月 22 日，綠城集團和證大集團聯名通知復星集團，表示願將它們在合資企業中持有的 50% 股份以 42.5 億元人民幣（6.93 億美元）的價格進行轉讓，要求復星集團在 2011 年 12 月 28 日之前回復是否接受此轉讓條件，但直到截止日期前，復星集團始終未同意接受此轉讓條件。 12 月 29 日，SOHO 中國與綠城及證大集團各自的母公司簽訂了收購合同，其中指明 SOHO 中國將以 40 億元人民幣的價格收購綠城和證大集團持有的全部股權。合同中明確要求綠城和證大集團必須出讓各自的其他資產，直至其在合資企業中持有的股權是唯一剩餘資產。就在同一天，SOHO 中國和綠城集團公開透露，SOHO 中國在完成上述股權交易後將間接持有合資企業的 50% 股權。復星集團隨即起訴 SOHO 中國和股權交易中的其他相關方，要求判決它們之間的交易無效。

新聞分析

判決書 2013 年 4 月，上海一中院作出判決如下：SOHO 中國獲得綠城集團和證大集團全部股權所發生的一系列交易涉嫌規避復星集團的優先購買權，因此相應交易無效。根據中華人民共和國公司法第 72 條規定，如果某有限責任公司的股權持有者希望向該公司當前股權持有者以外的一方轉讓股權，則必須獲得其他股權持有者至少過半數同意。如果股權持有者在收到轉讓通知後 30 天內未予以回復，則視為同意轉讓。對於經同意的股權轉讓，在與外界競購者提出的條款和條件相同的情況下，現有的股權持有者有權優先購買轉讓的股權（即優先購買權）。根據中華人民共和國合同法第 52 條第 (3) 款規定，“有以下情形之一的，合同無效： … (3) 以合法形式掩蓋非法目的。” 法院認為，優先購買權是法律賦予的合法權利，因此任何試圖規避該權利的行為都將視為懷有《合同法》第 52 條第 (3) 款所述的非法目的。 “法院發現，SOHO 中國在從綠城集團和證大集團各自的母公司處獲得其全部股權的過程中，所實施的一系列活動都帶有規避復星集團作為合資企業當前股權持有者所享有的優先購買權的目

Every statutory “provision carries a purpose that may allow the concerned parties to derogate from voluntarily, but does not allow acts of non-concerned parties to render it futile | 每一條法律條文都包含一定的目的，當事人可以自主選擇是否違背這一目的，但其他非當事人無權將其視為無效

”

Li Haifeng, Global Law Office, Beijing 李海峰, 環球律師事務所, 北京

的，並且復星集團的這項權利確實遭到了侵犯，”李海峰說。評論各界對本案判決的法律修正和可能產生的後果展開了激烈的辯論。辯論的焦點在於規避股權持有者的優先購買權是否構成《合同法》第 52 條第 (3) 款所述的非法目的。

State Council reinforces control over the property market | 國務院加強房地產市場調控 The General Office of the State Council has issued a Circular ensuring that municipalities create plans over price control and issue loans to cool China’s real estate market | 國務院辦公廳已發佈通知，允許直轄市/自治區制定房價控制計劃併發放貸款以為過熱的中國房地產市場降溫

房地產及建築

批評者認為，非法目的應僅限定於違反公共政策或強制性法規的行為，而不應擴展到優先購買權等私人權利或利益。支持者反駁說，任何目的只要是旨在造成與任何法律規定目的相悖的結果，無論是違反私人利益或公共政策、自由處理規定或強制性規定，都算是非法目的。 “批評者所持有的這種有關非法目的的狹義解釋沒有任何邏輯性，書本上也找不到，更沒有政策支撐。每一條法律條文都包含一定的目的，當事人可以自主選擇是否違背這一目的，但其他非當事人無權將其視為無效，”李海峰說。減輕風險本案將繼續上訴到上海市高級人民法院。在此之際，投資者可以採取若干措施以減輕風險。例如，如果控制股權持有者希望繼續操控全局並避免陷入困境，則首先應擁有高於 50% 的股份。另外，投資者在收購控股公司的股權時，如果遇到該控股公司的唯一資產是在中國境內另一家運營公司（或運營公司的另一家控股公司）持有的股權，而該運營公司內還有其他股權持有者的情況，應尤其注意。

he Circular on Continuing to Duly Regulate and Control the Real Property Market (國務院辦公廳關於繼續做好房地產市場調控工作的通知) was issued on February 26 2013. The Circular includes several property cooling measures that municipalities and local governments should use to guide future real estate policies. One of the most important aspects of the Circular is the 20% capital gains tax on real estate sales in cities where housing prices are rising too quickly. Article 2 of the Circular states: “tax shall be strictly imposed, in accordance with the law, at the rate of 20% of the proceeds.” In addition, the Circular has empowered the local or sub-branch of the People’s Bank of China to further increase the percentage of

中國法律商務2013年回顧

Real Estate & Construction

the down payment for and the interest rate on loans for the purchase of a second unit of residential premises. This condition only applies in cities where housing price are increasing excessively rapidly, but there is no further clarification as to what “excessively rapidly” actually means. Municipalities directly under the central government, cities with independent development plans and provincial capitals all have to formulate annual price control targets for newly constructed residential premises. These plans should be in line with the State Council’s principle of maintaining stable house prices. Beijing issued its own measures on March 30, which appear to be some of the strictest rules in the country to date. The measures include increasing the minimum down payment for a second home and to stop issuing sale licences for projects with prices that are much higher than the average in the region. In Shanghai, which also released measures on March 30, banks are forbidden to extend loans to buyers or third homes and the municipality must complete the construction of 10,000 affordable homes in 2013. Article 3 of the Circular also states that: “a reasonable and stable scale of supply of land

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

News analysis

for residential premises will be maintained. In principle, the total supply of land for housing in 2013 shall not be lower than the average actual supply during the past five years”. It is clear that the government is trying to control rising housing prices and at the same time provide lower income and first-time buyers with greater opportunities. While the Circular does limit the purchasing power of well-off individuals, it does not completely remove the possibility of buying second and third homes. This was the main reason the real estate market reached such dizzying heights.

國

務院辦公廳《關於繼續做好房地產市場調控工作的通知》於 2013 年 2 月 26 日發佈。通知中包括各直轄市/ 自治區和地方政府應用於指導未來房地產政策的若干項冷卻房地產市場過熱的措施。通知中最重要的一個方面是：在房價上漲過快的城市，對出售自有住房，將徵收個人所得稅，按房產銷售額的20% 的徵收。通知第 2 條規定： “應依法嚴格按照收入所得的 20% 計徵。” 另外，通知中還允許中國人民銀行的本地分行或支行進一步提高購買第二套住房貸款的首付款比例和貸款利率。

該方案僅在房價上漲過快的城市施行，但究竟如何判定某一城市的房價是否屬於“上漲過快”，通知中並未作進一步說明。直轄市、計劃單列市及各省會城市都必須制定年度新建住房價格控制目標。相應計劃應遵循國務院要求保持房價穩定的原則。 2013年3 月 30 日，北京市政府針對北京市各地區發佈了一系列相應措施，其嚴苛程度堪稱迄今為止國內之最。這些措施包括：提高第二套住房的最低首付款，以及停止向報價遠遠高於相應地區平均價格的項目發放銷售許可證。上海也於同日發佈措施：嚴禁銀行向第三套住房購買者發放貸款，並要求市政府必須在 2013 年內建成 10,000 套經濟適用房。另外，通知第 3 條規定：“保持合理、穩定的住房用地供應規模。原則上 2013 年住房用地供應總量應不低於過去 5 年平均實際供應量。” 很明顯，政府正試圖遏制不斷上漲的房價並同時為低收入及首次購房者提供更多機會。通知雖然在一定程度上制約了富人的購買，但並未完全消除其購買第二套及第三套住房的可能性。這正是房地產市場一路飆升的主要原因。

Leading Real Estate and Construction lawyers Real Estate David Blumenfeld, Paul Hastings Janofsky & Walker Yusong Du, Grandall Law Firm Anthony Qiao, Zhong Lun Law Firm Joel Rothstein, Paul Hastings Janofsky & Walker Binxue Sang, Jun He Wang Ying Ying, Fangda Partners Construction John Bishop, Pinsent Masons Yusong Du, Grandall Law Firm Will Fung, Grandall Law Firm Hew Kian Heong, Pinsent Masons Ashley Howlett, Jones Day Nuo Ji, Fangda Partners Xueping Yu, Jun He

Source: Asialaw Leading Lawyers 2013

觀察

房地產及建築

Looking for new opportunities Eric Chen of Dacheng Law Offices looks at the latest developments in the real estate sector, including the move to office property, logistics and industrial real estate 1. What important legislation and policies on foreign investment in the real estate sector have been issued in China during the past year? With respect to foreign exchange control, the Circular on Further Improving and Revising the Foreign Exchange Control Policy on Direct Investment (Hui Fa [2012] No.59) issued by the State Administration of Foreign Exchange improves the manner of exchange control relating to direct investment by eliminating and revising certain administrative permission items relating to exchange control in respect of direct investment. The major changes relevant to foreign investment in real estate are: (1) elimination of approvals for reinvestment by foreign investors of income lawfully derived in China; (2) simplification of foreign exchange registration procedures for foreign investment in respect of the acquisition of the equity of the Chinese party by the foreign investor; (3) elimination of approvals for the purchase of foreign exchange for overseas payment in connection with direct investments; and (4) permitting foreign-invested enterprises to issue loans to their offshore parent companies, with the limit on such loans not to exceed the sum of the profits distributed to the foreign investor but not outwardly remitted and the proportion of the retained profits to which the foreign investor is entitled. Furthermore, this year, the State Council has determined five policy measures relating to real estate control (the new five measures), the main contents of which include: (1) improving the responsibility system for the task of stabilising housing prices; (2) resolutely suppressing speculative purchase of premises; (3) increasing the supply of ordinary commercially developed housing and land; (4) accelerating the planning and construction of low income home ownership projects; and (5) beefing up market oversight. Medium-sized and large municipalities, such as Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou and Shenzhen have also issued local implementing rules for the new five measures. Following the successive issuance of the new five measures and the local implementing rules, housing prices and purchases have been suppressed to varying degrees, thereby affecting the investment by foreign-invested real estate enterprises in housing projects and causing a diversion of these investments into commercial property, industrial real estate projects, logistics real estate. With respect to foreign investment in the real estate sector, the relevant Chinese authorities are currently seeking more flexible policies and simplified approval procedures, while the number of foreign-invested real estate enterprises that have undergone record filing with

With respect to foreign investment in the real estate sector, the relevant Chinese authorities are currently seeking more flexible policies

中國法律商務2013年回顧

Real Estate & Construction

Insights

the Ministry of Commerce is continuously increasing. It should be noted that the Chinese government continues to stringently regulate the round tripping of investment in the real estate sector.

2. Which main types of real estate projects have recently been favoured by foreign real estate private equity funds? What are the reasons underlying this? Recently, the eyes of foreign real estate private equity funds have been turning away from the traditional housing projects and commercial (shopping centre) projects to office property, logistics real estate projects and industrial real estate projects. The underlying reasons are: (1) with the issuance of policies placing restrictions on purchases in housing projects and reasons such as the estimation of, and payback period for, returns on investment, private foreign-invested real estate funds generally do not now view housing real estate projects as a primary option; (2) because of the existence of a certain bubble in commercial (shopping centre) real estate projects and the relatively high follow-up operating costs in these projects, they tend to be wary about investing in such projects; (3) the costs for acquiring office property away from prime locations are relatively low, there is a certain predictability of the returns on these investments and the follow-up operating costs are also comparatively more controllable; and (4) modern logistics facilities and warehousing property are currently in extremely short supply in China, the state has designated the logistics sector as a modern service industry sector that is to be heavily supported and encouraged. Furthermore, pursuant to relevant provisions of the Department of Foreign Investment Administration of the Ministry of Commerce, foreign investment in logistics (warehousing) real estate does not constitute foreign investment in the real estate sector, accordingly, foreign investment in logistics real estate is not subject to the numerous restrictions on foreign investment in the real estate sector in China.

3. What are the prospects like for new sections of the real estate industry such as logistics real estate and industrial real estate? Logistics real estate In recent years, growth in domestic demand in China has sparked the rapid growth of the logistics industry, but there still remains a serious shortage in the supply of modern logistics facilities. The National Development and Reform Commission, the China Securities Regulatory Commission and 10 other departments have jointly issued the Implementing Opinions on Encouraging and Guiding Private Investment into the Logistics Sector, which expressly propose to support the investment of private capital in the construction of logistics infrastructure in sectors such as transportation, warehousing, delivery, distribution, logistics computerisation as well as logistics parks, and to offer more support to logistics enterprises in terms of optimisation of land policy and financial environment. During the last few years, due to demand outstripping supply, average rents in China’s logistics warehouse sector have increased approximately 5% to 10% each year.

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

During the last few years, due to demand outstripping supply, average rents in China’s logistics warehouse sector have increased approximately 5% to 10% each year China’s online retail industry has been expanding rapidly, meaning that the demand for warehousing space and property will continue to grow.

Industrial real estate The outline of the state’s 12th Five-year Plan proposes a focus on adjusting the industrial structure, and treating industrial chains as the links and industrial parks as the soil to develop a large number of modern industrial concentrations with refreshing professional character, excellent brand images and complete service platforms. Against such a background, the models for developing industrial real estate are continuously developing in innovative directions and supply and demand are continuously expanding. Under the new five measures, industrial real estate has been promoted to industrial property for comprehensive ancillary services. Cooperation with brick and mortar enterprises is the new model for industrial real estate.

4. Recently, what have been the main channels for raising funds for private real estate funds in China? What methods are normally used to carry out investment? What are the particular features of the various investment methods? Recently, the main channels available to private real estate funds to raise funds include: (1) funds of funds; (2) trust funds; (3) enterprise capital; and (4) private capital. Renminbi private equity funds in China mainly raise funds through enterprise capital and private capital channels. The funds of type (1) and (2) mainly favour funds sponsored by state enterprises and by relatively robust developers, whereas the funds of type (3) and (4) favour funds other than funds sponsored by state enterprises and developers. The investment methods of private real estate funds include: (1) debt investment; (2) equity investment; (3) bridge financing; and (4) combined debt and equity investment. The particular features of the various investment methods are as follows: (1) debt investment: stable, relatively low investment risk, short investment period and high return rate; (2) equity investment: attaches importance to the future growth prospects and capital value increase of the investee enterprise, participates in the enterprise’s operations, management and material decisions, investment risks are relatively high, the investment period long and relies on an exit mechanism to sell the equity held to realise the returns; (3) bridge financing: satisfies short-term funding needs, financing costs high, repayment period short and requires collateral from the enterprise as security; and (4) combined debt and equity investment: the equity

觀察

Author biography Eric Chen (Partner) Specialising in the sectors of real estate, infrastructure, logistics and energy, Eric Chen has been advising for various leading international PE funds and investment entities such as Morgan Stanley, Carlyle Group, Wells Fargo, JP Morgan, KKR, Aetos, Citigroup, Grosvenor, Bain Capital, ARA, CLSA, APL and GLP in their acquisition transactions and strategic investments in China. Further, Chen regularly advises leading international law firms such as Allen & Overy, Paul Hastings, Morrison & Foerster, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, DLA Piper, White & Case and Baker & McKenzie in relation to various PRC legal matters. He has an LLM from the University of Edinburgh, Law School and an LLB from Soochow University, Law School.

investment only accounts for a small portion of the entire financing need of the target enterprise, with the remaining portion invested by way of debt, and to ensure that the project risks and return rate are relatively stable, the investment period is usually longer than that of a bridge financing.

5. What are the main taxes on private real estate funds in China organised as limited partnerships? The main taxes on a private real estate fund organised as a limited partnership (LP) include: (1) exemption of enterprise income tax at the fund level; (2) natural person LPs are subject to 20% income tax on dividends, extra dividends and capital gains; and legal person LPs are exempt from tax on dividends and extra dividends and subject to 25% income tax on capital gains; (3) at the legal person general partnership (GP) level, they are exempt from tax on dividends and extra dividends and subject to 25% income tax on carry and capital gains; and (4) at the management company level, in addition to including the management fee it charges in its annual taxable income and paying income tax thereon, it is also subject to 5% business tax (see Figure 1 below). It has recently been reported that the state tax authority is considering rules for the withholding of income tax before a limited partnership fund makes a distribution to LPs and GPs, and the possibility that relevant specific provisions will be issued in the near future cannot be excluded.

Figure 1 Management fee subject to (1) Enterprise income tax (2) 5% business tax

6. What are the financing channels available, in general, to real estate enterprises in China at present? What are the particular features of the various financing channels? The main financing channels available to real estate enterprises in China include: (1) bank loan financing: interest rates are greatly affected by policy, and financing is relatively difficult; (2) real estate trust financing: the term is relatively long, financing costs low, the method is flexible, proceeds large, variable sources are available and fund raising period short; (3) private real estate fund financing: term is relatively short, financing costs low, the method is flexible, variable sources are available and fund raising period short.

7. What are your predictions on the most recent developments and timetable for the launching of REITs in China? In March this year, the China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) promulgated the Provisions for the Administration of the Asset Securitisation Business of Securities Companies, which in truth is paving the way for the launch of REITs. The CSRC has completed the feasibility study and preparatory work relating to the launching of REITs and is preparing to select the appropriate time to issue a draft for comments on the relevant rules. According to forecasts, the drafting of the long anticipated provisions permitting investment in the form of REITs has been completed, and it is likely that REITs will become reality in the near future. The drafting of provisions addressing REITs will mainly focus on the regulatory body for REITs and their lawful form, but the question of whether the barriers to investment by foreign investors will be removed will not be included on the discussion agenda for the moment. According to forecasts, the first-stage provisions addressing REITs may touch upon many restrictions on, and the regulation of, REITs managers. Investment in REITs by foreign investors may be restricted, preventing them from directly investing in REITs and requiring them to sell the REITs products specified by the competent authority through equity joint ventures with enterprises in China. Based on the experiences and lessons learnt from the development of securities investment funds in China and taking into account the REITs models in other countries and regions, the regulators will effect regulation over aspects such as asset requirements, structure design and duties of the participants. Legal person GP

Fund management company

房地產及建築

Private real estate fund organised as a limited partnership

(1) Dividends and extra dividends exempt from tax (2) Carry subject to 25% income tax (3) Capital gains subject to 25% income tax

Exempt from enterprise income tax

Legal person LP

(1) Dividends and extra dividends exempt from tax (2) Capital gains subject to 25% income tax

Natural person LP

(1) Dividends and extra dividends subject to 20% income tax (2) Capital gains subject to 20% income tax

中國法律商務2013年回顧

Real Estate & Construction

Insights

尋找新機遇大成律師事務所的陳巍律師探討房地產行業的最新發展, 包括轉向辦公物業、物流地產項目以及工業地產項目 1. 過去一年內中國有哪些關于外商投資房地產業的重要立法和政策出臺？在外匯管理方面，國家外匯管理局發布的《關于進一步改進和調整直接投資外匯管理政策的通知》(匯發[2012]59號)，改進直接投資外匯管理方式，取消和調整部分直接投資外匯管理行政許可項目。與外商投資房地產相關的主要改變為：(1)取消外國投資者境內合法所得再投資核准；(2)簡化外國投資者收購中方股權外資外匯登記手續；(3)取消直接投資項下購匯及對外支付核准；(4)允許外商投資企業向其境外母公司放款，放款額度不得超過該外國投資者已分配未匯出利潤以及按比例享有的未分配利潤之和。此外，今年國務院確定了五項關于房地產調控工作的政策措施(新國五條)，主要內容包括：(1)完善穩定房價工作責任制；(2)堅決抑制投機投資性購房；(3) 增加普通商品住房及用地供應；(4)加快保障性安居工程規劃建設；(5)加強市場監管。北京、上海、廣州、深圳等大中城市也針對新國五條發布了地方實施細則。在新國五條及各地細則陸續發布後，住宅的價格及購買受到了不同程度的抑制，從而影響了外商投資房地產企業對于住宅類項目的投資，投資的項目開始轉移到商業物業、工業地產項目、物流地產等領域。總體上，針對外商投資房地產業，中國相關部門正在謀求更加靈活的政策，以簡化審批程序，同時，通過商務部備案的外商投資房地產企業不斷增多。需要注意的是，對于房地產領域的返程投資行為中國政府仍然進行嚴格監管。 2. 近期外資地產私募基金主要青睞哪類地產項目？背後有哪些原因？近期外資地產私募基金主要青睞對象正從傳統的住宅項目、商業(商場)項目轉向辦公物業、物流地產項目以及工業地產項目。其背後的原因在于：(1)隨着住宅項目限購政策的出臺以及投資回報測算及周期等原因，外資地產私募基金目前一般不將住宅地產項目作為首選；(2)商業(商場)地產項目已存在一定泡沫，并且該類項目後續運營成本較高，因此投資商業(商場)項目也會持謹慎的態度；(3)非一線地段的辦公物業相對收購成本較低，投資回報有一定預期，後續運營成本也相對可控；(4)國內目前的現代化物流設施和倉儲物業供應嚴重不足，國家已將物流行業確定為重點扶持和鼓勵的現代服務業領域。并且，根據商務部外資司相關規定，外商投資物流(倉儲)地產不屬于外商投資房地產領域，因此外商投資物流地產不會受到中國境內對于外商投資房地產領域的諸多規定的限制。 3. 物流地產、工業地產等房地產行業新興板塊的前景如何？ (1) 物流地產近年來，中國內需增長推動了物流行業的飛速發展，但是，現代化物流設施的供給仍然嚴重不足。國家發改委、證監會等12部門聯合下發了《關于鼓勵和引

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

針對外商投資房地產業，中國相關部門正在謀求更加靈活的政策

觀察

作者簡歷陳巍 (合伙人) 陳巍律師服務的客戶主要包括摩根斯坦利、凱雷、富國銀行、Aetos、花旗、摩根大通、高富諾、KKR、ARA、普洛斯等國外大型房地產、基礎設施、物流、能源等相關基金及投資機構。此外，和陳巍律師經常合作的國際律師事務所包括Allen & Overy LLP, Morrison & Foerster LLP, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, DLA Piper, White & Case LLP, Baker & McKenzie 等。陳巍律師擁有英國愛丁堡大學法學院法學碩士學位和蘇州大學法學院法學學士學位。

導民間投資進入物流領域的實施意見》，其中明確提出支持民間資本投資運輸、倉儲、配送、分撥、物流信息化以及物流園區等領域的物流基礎設施建設，并在土地政策和融資環境上給予物流企業更多的優化支持。在過去幾年內，由于供不應求，中國物流倉儲領域的平均租金每年增長5%—10%左右。中國的網上零售業呈現快速擴張趨勢，因此對于倉儲空間和物業的需求仍將會增加。 (2) 工業地產國家十二五規劃綱要提出，要重點進行產業結構調整，以產業鏈為紐帶，以產業園區為載體，發展一大批專業特色鮮明、品牌形象突出、服務平臺完備的現代產業集群。在這種背景下，工業地產的開發模式正在不斷的創新發展，供應量和需求量在不斷增加。“新國五條”下，工業地產已升級為綜合配套服務的工業物業。與實體企業合作，是工業地產的新模式。 4. 近期境內的房地產私募基金的主要資金募集渠道來自哪里？通常采用哪些方式進行投資？各種投資方式的特點是什麼？近期境內的房地產私募基金的主要資金募集渠道包括：(1)母基金；(2)信托資金；(3)企業資本；(4)民間資本。中國境內人民幣私募基金主要是采取企業資本和民間資本的渠道進行募資。第(1)、(2)類資金主要青睞國企和比較有實力的開發商發

起的基金，而(3)、(4)類資金主要青睞國企和開發商發起的基金以外的基金。房地產私募基金的投資方式包括：(1)債權投資；(2)股權投資；(3)過橋投資；(4)債權與股權結合投資。各投資方式的特點在于：(1)債權投資：穩定，投資風險相對較低，投資期短，收益率高；(2)股權投資：注重被投資企業未來發展前景和資本增值，且參與企業經營管理和重大決策，投資風險相對較大，投資期長，借助退出機制出售持股獲利；(3)過橋投資：滿足短期資金需求，融資成本高，償還期限短，需要企業抵押物擔保；(4)債權與股權結合投資：股權投資僅占項目公司全部所需融資額的少部分，其餘部分通過債權方式投入，以確保項目的風險和收益率相對穩定，投資期限通常超過過橋投資。 5. 境內有限合伙制的房地產私募基金主要的稅賦包括哪些？有限合伙制房地產私募基金架構下，主要稅賦包括：(1)基金層面免征企業所得稅；(2)自然人LP就股息紅利被徵收20%所得稅及就資本利得被徵收20%所得稅；法人LP就股息紅利免稅，就資本利得被徵收25%所得稅；(3)在法人GP層面，就股息紅利免稅，就超額收益(Carry)及資本利得將被徵收25%所得稅；(4)在管理公司層面，收取的管理費除應計入年度所得額繳納所得稅外，還需計征5%的營業稅 (見圖1)。目前有消息稱，國家稅務管理部門正就有限合伙制基金向 LP和GP進行分配之前代扣代繳其所得稅的細則進行研究，不排除近期出臺相關明確規定的可能性。 6. 目前境內房地產企業的融資渠道一般有哪些？各融資渠道有什麼特點？境內房地產企業的主要融資渠道包括：(1)銀行貸款融資：利率受政策影響大，融資比較困難；(2)房地產信托融資：期限較長，融資成本低，方式靈活，資金量大，來源多，籌集時間短；(3)房地產私募基金融資：期限較短，融資成本低，方式靈活，來源多，籌集時間短。 7. 您對境內REITs推出的最新進展和時間表有什麼預測？今年三月，證監會公布《證券公司資產證券化業務管理規定》，實際是為推出REITs鋪路。中國證監會已完成推出 REITs的相關可行性研究和準備工作，并準備選擇恰當的時間發布相關規則徵求意見稿。據預測，期待已久的針對允許以REITs的形式進行投資的

圖1

法人GP 就管理費計征 (1) 企業所得稅 (2) 5%營業稅

基金管理公司

房地產及建築

有限合伙制私募房地產基金

(1) 股息紅利免稅 (2) 超額收益(Carry)得計征25% (3) 資本利得計征25%

免征企業所得稅

法人LP

(1) 股息紅利免稅 (2) 資本利得計征25%

自然人LP

(1) 股息紅利計征20% (2) 資本利得計征20%

中國法律商務2013年回顧

Real Estate & Construction

Insights

規定已經起草完畢，境內REITs有望在近期落地。針對REITs 的規定的起草，將主要集中在REITs的監管主體、REITs的合法形式，關于是否去除外資投資障礙，將不會納入目前討論議程。據預測，針對REITs的第一階段規定可能會涉及很多對 REITs管理者的限制及監管。針對境外投資者投資REITs的投

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

資可能受限，不能直接投資REITs，而需要通過與境內企業合資的方式出售主管機關羅列的REITs產品。在借鑒我國證券投資基金的發展經驗和教訓的基礎上，結合其他國家和地區的 REITs模式，監管層將對資產要求、結構設計、參與方的職責等方面進行監管。

入圍名單

年度獎項

AWARDS

Book of the night Including deals, teams and firms of the year, here is the complete list of nominations for this year’s China Law & Practice awards | 今年《中國法律商務》年度獎項完整的入圍名單，包括了年度傑出交易，傑出團隊及律所

Deals of the year | 年度杰出交易 Debt & Equity-Linked | 債務和股票掛鉤證券 Baidu SEC-registered bond | 百度發行 SEC 登記債券 Davis Polk & Wardwell | 達維律師事務所

行人只有菲律賓共和國、韓國金融公司和韓國進出口銀行。此外，交易顧問需要根據當地要求考慮百度的可變利益實體(VIE)結構，而目前該結構在中國的合法性尚未明確。為降低風險，法律顧問設計出了就控制條款需更改時的可回購方案。

JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs | 摩根大通及高盛

Jingtian & Gongcheng | 競天公誠律師事務所 JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs | 摩根大通及高盛

Han Kun Law Offices | 漢坤律師事務所 Baidu | 百度

Li & Partners | 李偉斌律師行 Baidu | 百度

Maples and Calder | 邁普達律師事務所 Baidu | 百度

Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom | 世達國際律師事務所 Baidu | 百度

In November 2012, Chinese web company Baidu became the first Chinese corporate in over a decade to issue US-registered securities off a well-known seasoned issuer shelf. In another first, this is the first time a US-registered bond was listed on the Singapore Exchange. The issue also marked the first corporate offering Asia ex-Japan to be US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) registered. The Republic of the Philippines, the Korea Finance Corporation and the Export-Import Bank of Korea are the only other issuers in Asia that have printed SEC-compliant bonds. Furthermore, deal counsel had to manage concerns regarding Baidu’s variable interest entity (VIE) structure, which has an uncertain legal status in China. To mitigate risk, counsel included an innovative repurchase upon change of control provision. 2012 年 11 月，百度成為中國近十年間第一個通過儲架發行方式及“ 知名成熟發行人”（WKSI)方式發行美元債券的中國公司。此外，這也是首批在美國登記、在新加坡交易所掛牌交易的債券。此次發行使百度成為亞洲範圍內（日本除外）的首家在美國證券交易委員會 (SEC) 登記發行債券的企業。亞洲其他擁有符合 SEC 要求的債券發

Gemdale high-yield bonds | 金地集團發行高收益債券 Clifford Chance | 高偉紳律師事務所 Gemdale | 金地集團 Commerce & Finance Law Offices | 通商律師事務所 HSBC and JP Morgan | 匯豐及摩根大通 Linklaters | 年利達律師事務所 HSBC and JP Morgan | 匯豐及摩根大通 Chinese property developer Gemdale’s inaugural US dollar bond offering was the first international bond offering from an A-share listed company without a guarantee. The five-year fixed rate bond issue of $350 million had a coupon of 7.125%. The issue is credited with kickstarting the Chinese real estate high-yield market by introducing a new way to circumvent regulatory issues. PRC companies are not permitted to guarantee offshore debt offerings without the approval of the State Administration of Foreign Exchange (SAFE). Gemdale circumvented this process by including a keepwell agreement, or a commitment to avoid insolvency risk. To give comfort to investors in the event of a default, counsel also included a deed of equity interest purchase undertaking. Although the challenging $350 million offering lacked a guarantee, ratings agencies looked at its structure favourably. It was rated Ba3 by Moody’s and BB- by S&P. HSBC was sole global coordinator and lead manager, while JP Morgan was a bookrunner. 內地地產商金地集團發行的首批美元債券是第一個A 股上市公司發行的無擔保的國際債券。這批 3.5 億美元 5 年固定利率債券的票息為 7.125%。該債券的發行被認為是中國的房地產市場為規避某些法規監管而另辟蹊徑的創新做法。因為中國企業只有在獲得國家外匯管理局 (SAFE) 的批准後才可以發行擔保離岸債券。而金地集團回避了

中國法律商務2013年回顧

Annual Awards

NOMINATIONS

該程序，採用支持協議 (keepwell agreement)及股權回購承諾來避免今後無力償債的風險。所謂回購承諾，即提供了股權轉讓協議，可在未來無力償債時給予投資者安慰。雖然 3.5 億美元的債券由於缺乏擔保而具有挑戰性，但是評級機構認為金地集團結構穩定。穆迪給予金地集團 Ba3 評級，標準普爾給予金地集團 BB-評級。匯豐銀行是金地集團的獨家全球協調人和牽頭經理人，而摩根大通則是其賬簿管理人。

CNPC $2 billion guaranteed senior bonds and $7 billion EMTN programme | 中石油 20 億美元的高級擔保債券和 70 億美元的歐洲中期票據發行 Appleby CNPC (bonds and EMTN) | 中石油

Clifford Chance | 高偉紳律師事務所 Underwriters (bonds and EMTN) | 承銷商 Davis Polk & Wardwell | 達維律師事務所

CNOOC’s $4 billion guaranteed notes offering | 中海油發行 40 億美元擔保票據 Davis Polk & Wardwell | 達維律師事務所 CNOOC | 中國海洋石油總公司

Walkers CNOOC | 中國海洋石油總公司

Linklaters | 年利達律師事務所 Underwriters | 票據包銷商

Commerce & Finance Law Offices | 通商律師事務所 Underwriters | 票據包銷商

CNOOC’s US$4 billion bond was the biggest international issue in Asia in a decade and the largest ever by a Chinese issuer. The deal was five times oversubscribed. It consisted of $750 million 1.125% guaranteed notes due 2016, $750 million 1.75% guaranteed notes due 2018, $2 billion 3% guaranteed notes due 2023 and $500 million 4.25% guaranteed notes due 2043. CNOOC issued the bonds through its BVI subsidiary, CNOOC Finance. This was the first well-known seasoned issuer (WKSI) deal by an HK-listed company and the first SEC-registered bond deal to list on the HKEx. A waiver had to be obtained from HKEx as technically the deal did not conform with Chapter 37 of the listing rules because retail investors could subscribe for the notes in the US. CNOOC is an upstream company specialising in the exploration, production and development of oil and natural gas. The net proceeds of $3.942 billion were used to repay part of the $6 billion short-term credit facility used to buy Nexen. 中國海洋石油總公司的 40 億美元票據發行是十年來亞洲最大的一筆國際發行，也是中國發行者最大的國際發行。此項發行被5 倍超額認購。此次發行包括：2016 年到期本金為 7.5 億美元利率為 1.125% 的擔保票據、2018 年到期本金為 7.5 億美元利率為 1.75% 的擔保票據、2023年到期本金為 20 億美元利率為 3% 的擔保票據以及 2043 年到期本金為 5 億美元利率為 4.25% 的擔保票據。中國海洋石油總公司通過其註冊在英屬維京群島的子公司中海石油財務公司發行的票據。這是首次由香港上市公司進行的知名成熟發行人 (WKSI) 發行，也是首個在香港交易所 (HKEx) 掛牌的在 SEC 登記的票據發行。由於香港主板對債券類產品發行的第37條禁止散戶購買票據，而這與美國SEC做法相左，鑒於這是在SEC登記的票據且在香港交易所發行，該項發行獲得了香港交易所的豁免（第37條），允許散戶購買。中國海洋石油總公司是專門從事石油和天然氣勘探、生產和開發的上游公司。該發行中的39.42 億美元將用於償還為收購尼克森公司的 60 億美元短期貸款的一部分。

Underwriters (bonds and EMTN) | 承銷商

Jun He | 君合律師事務所 CNPC General Capital Limited (bonds and EMTN) | 中石油於英屬維京群島設立的財務公司 King & Wood Mallesons | 金杜律師事務所 CNPC (bonds and EMTN) | 中石油

Shearman & Sterling | 謝爾曼•思特靈律師事務所 CNPC (bonds and EMTN) | 中石油

This is CNPC’s biggest overseas bond to date. The US$2 billion in senior bonds consisted of a Rule 144/Reg S Offering of US$750 million 1.45% guaranteed senior notes due 2016, US$500 million 1.95% guaranteed senior notes due 2018 and US$750 million 3.4% guaranteed senior notes due 2023. This was guaranteed by CNPC Finance (HK). CNPC is an SOE oil and gas corporation with its headquarters in Beijing. It used its BVI subsidiary, CNPC General Capital Limited, to issue the notes, which will be used for the company’s overseas operations. 這是迄今為止中石油公司發行的最大海外債券。20 億美元的高級債券包括遵循 144 規則/Reg S 發行的 2016 年到期本金為 7.5 億美元利率為 1.45% 的高級擔保債券、2018 年到期本金為 5 億美元利率為 1.95% 的高級擔保債券以及 2023 年到期本金為 7.5億美元利率為 3.4% 的高級擔保債券。這些均由中國石油財務（香港）有限公司擔保。中石油公司是總部位於北京的國有石油天然氣公司。該公司利用其設立在英屬唯京群島的離岸子公司CNPC General Capital Limited 公司來發債，用於公司的海外運作。

SOHO China $1 billion high-yield note offering | SOHO 中國的10 億美元高收益票據發行 Commerce & Finance Law Offices | 通商律師事務所 Underwriters | 票據包銷商

Davis Polk & Wardwell | 達維律師事務所 Underwriters | 票據包銷商

Lex Caribbean SOHO China | SOHO中國

MdME SOHO China | SOHO中國

Sidley Austin | 盛德國際律師事務所 SOHO China | SOHO中國

Walkers SOHO China | SOHO中國

Zhong Lun Law Firm | 中倫律師事務所 SOHO China | SOHO中國

Soho China is only the second Chinese developer to issue a 10-year bond, after Shimao Property Holding’s US$350 million deal in 2006. It was also one of the largest high-yield deals of 2012. The offering consisted of $600 million of 5.75%

100

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

入圍名單

senior notes due 2017 and $400 million of 7.125% senior notes due 2022 and was completed in November last year. Soho China, a commercial property developer that is focused on central Beijing and Shanghai, plans to use the proceeds for corporate purposes and some temporary cash investments. The bond was oversubscribed by more than seven times by high-net worth investors and fund managers, which lead to the additional US$400 million being added. 繼 2006 年世茂房地產控股有限公司 3.5 億美元的債券發行後，SOHO 中國成為第二個發行10年期債券的中國地產開發商。該發行也是 2012年最大的高收益債券的發行之一。此次發行包括 2017 年到期本金為 6 億美元利率為 5.75% 的高級票據以及 2022 年到期本金為 4 億美元利率為 7.125% 的高級票據，於去年 11 月完成。SOHO中國是專注於北京和上海中心的商業房地產開發商，計劃利用債券發行實現企業宗旨並進行一些短期現金投資。此債券獲得了高淨值投資者和基金管理者超過 7 倍的超額認購，帶來了額外 4 億美元的增值。

Energy & Natural Resources | 能源及自然資源類 CNOOC acquisition of Nexen for $15.1 billion | 中海油 151 億美元收購加拿大尼克森 Blake Cassels & Graydon | 佈雷克律師事務所

價格每股 17.06 美元溢價 62%。這次收購是有史以來加拿大第五大外資收購案，也是中國最大的外資收購出價。由於中國海洋石油總公司是中國的國有企業，加拿大政府對其審查格外嚴格，使得這項收購變得很複雜。加拿大政府也因該項目特別針對外國國有企業修改了原有的外商投資指導方針。在此之前，多筆重要的外商投資都因此項法案被否決，例如加拿大鉀肥公司拒絕了澳大利亞必和必拓有限公司提出的 380 億美元收購提議。中國海洋石油總公司總部設於北京，是中國最大的海上原油和天然氣生產商，主要從事勘探、開發、生產和銷售石油、天然氣業務。該公司在中國近海擁有四個主要產油區，在亞洲、非洲、北美州、南美洲以及大洋洲均擁有石油和天然氣資產。

Yancoal Australia’s A$8 billion acquisition with Gloucester Coal | 兗州煤業澳洲子公司以 80 億澳元並購澳洲煤炭生產商格羅斯特 Baker & McKenzie | 貝克•麥堅時國際律師事務所 Yanzhou Coal | 兗州煤業

Dacheng Law Offices | 大成律師事務所 Yancoal Australia | 兗煤澳洲公司 Herbert Smith Freehills | 史密夫律師事務所 Yanzhou Coal, Yancoal Australia | 兗州煤業，兗煤澳洲

Nexen | 尼克森

King & Wood Mallesons | 金杜律師事務所

Paul Weiss Rifkind Wharton & Garrison | 寶維斯律師事務所

Yancoal Australia | 兗煤澳洲公司

Nexen | 尼克森

Minter Ellison | 銘德律師事務所 Gloucester Coal | 格羅斯特煤業

Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt

年度獎項

Nexen | 尼克森

Stikeman Elliott | 司特曼律師事務所 CNOOC | 中海油

Davis Polk & Wardwell | 達維律師事務所 CNOOC | 中海油

Herbert Smith Freehills | 史密夫律師事務所 CNOOC | 中海油

Morrison & Foerster | 美富律師事務所 CNOOC | 中海油

Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton | 佳利律師事務所 Citigroup | 花旗集團

On July 23 2012, Nexen signed a definitive agreement to be acquired by CNOOC, a Beijing corporation for US$27.50 per Nexen share (approximately $15.1 billion).The offer provided a premium of 62% based on Nexen’s closing share price on July 20 2012 of $17.06.This was the fifth largest foreign takeover in Canadian history and China’s largest ever foreign takeover bid. CNOOC’s status as a state-owned enterprise (SOE) complicated this deal as Investment Canada placed greater emphasis on the review. It also caused the Canadian government to release revised foreign investment guidelines, particularly directed at foreign SOEs. Significant foreign investments have been rejected under this act in the past, such as the proposed $38 billion acquisition of Potash Corporation of Saskatchewan by Australian BHP Billiton Limited. CNOOC, a China based company headquartered in Beijing, is China’s largest producer of offshore crude oil and natural gas who primarily engages in exploration, development, production and sales of oil and natural gas and has four major producing areas in offshore China as well as oil and gas assets in Asia, Africa, North America, South America and Oceania. 2012 年 7 月 23 日，加拿大石油集團尼克森公司簽署了最終協議，同意中國海洋石油總公司以每股 27.5 美元的價格（總價約 151 億美元）收購尼克森公司。此價格相比 2012 年 7 月 20 日尼克森的收盤

This acquisition created Australia’s largest independent coal producer by saleable production.Yancoal Australia, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Yanzhou Coal Mining acquired Gloucester Coal for A$8 billion (US$7.3 billion). Yancoal Australia is mainly responsible for investment of projects in Australia by Yanzhou Coal Mining. Its main assets are located in New South Wales and Queensland, including five operating coal mines and eight coal resources exploration projects. Gloucester Coal is an 87% subsidiary of Noble Group, Asia’s largest diversified commodities trading company with revenue of more than US$30billion. This transaction marked the biggest investment by a Chinese state-owned company in Australia’s coal industry. Yancoal Australia will take Gloucester Coal as an ASX listed company and become the largest independent publicly-listed coal mining company in Australia. At the same time,Yanzhou Coal Mining became the only Chinese company in the coal mining industry whose stocks are listed on stock exchanges of Shanghai, Hong Kong, New York and Sydney. The acquisition was approved by the Australian Supreme Court in Victoria on June 13 2012. This acquisition almost doubles Yanzhou’s coalmines in Australia, as well as expanding its access to ports. 此次並購造就了澳大利亞實用生產領域最大的獨立煤炭生產商。兗州煤業旗下的全資附屬公司兗煤澳洲以 80 億澳元（73 億美元）的價格收購了格羅斯特煤炭公司。兗煤澳洲公司主要負責兗州煤礦在澳大利亞的項目投資，公司的主要資產位於新南威爾士州和昆士蘭州，包括五個生產煤礦和八個煤炭資源勘查項目。格羅斯特煤炭 87% 的股份為來寶集團持有，該集團是亞洲最大的多元化商品貿易公司，收入超過 300 億美元。此次交易是中國國有企業在澳大利亞煤炭行業規模最大的投資。兗煤澳洲和格羅斯特煤炭合併後將在澳洲證券交易所上市，成為澳大利亞最大的獨立上市煤炭公司。與此同時，兗州煤業也將成為煤炭開採業唯一一家在上海、中國香港、紐約和悉尼四個證券交易所上市的中國公司。2012 年 6 月 13 日，澳大利亞維多利亞州最高法院批准了此收購，這不僅使兗州煤業在澳大利亞的煤礦翻倍，也拓展了其出口通路。

中國法律商務2013年回顧

101

Annual Awards

NOMINATIONS

Beijing Enterprise Water Group acquired CGEP | 北控水務收購葡萄牙水務CGEP Uría Menéndez | 烏利亞律師事務所 Beijing Enterprise Water Group | 北控水務

Slaughter & May | 司力達律師事務所 Beijing Enterprise Water Group | 北控水務

Hong Kong stock exchange-listed Beijing Enterprises Water Group (BEWG) signed a sale and purchase agreement to acquire CompagnieGénérale des Eaux Portugal (CGEP) from Veolia Eau-Compagnie Générale des Eaux for €95.1 million in cash on March 21 2013. The consideration is subject to an adjustment of up to €5 million, giving a maximum aggregate consideration of approximately €100.1 million. The scope of the transaction includes four concession agreements for the operation and management of the supply of drinking water and the collection, treatment and disposal of waste water for the municipalities of Mafra, Ourém, Valongo and Paredes. It also includes three operation and maintenance contracts for waste water treatment plants in the Algarve region and a contract for the maintenance of drinking water plants of the Algarve region and the maintenance of sewage and drainage networks and management of recycling centers and waste storage systems for several private companies. This is one of the largest outbound investments in the environmental business by a Chinese company. BEWG is engaged in the construction, operation and maintenance of sewage, water treatment and seawater desalination plants, as well as in the distribution and sale of piped water in the PRC. 2013 年 3 月 21 日，香港證券交易所上市公司北控水務集團 (BEWG) 簽署了買賣協議，以 9,510 萬歐元現金收購法國威立雅水務公司旗下的葡萄牙水務公司 CGEP。該收購價格可予調整最多 500 萬歐元，即收購最高總代價約為 1.001 億歐元。此次收購包括四項涉及經營和管理葡萄牙Mafra、Ourém、Valongo 和 Paredes四個市飲用水供應及廢水收集、處理和治理問題的特許權協議、三項涉及葡萄牙南端Algarve 地區污水處理廠的經營和維護合約，以及一項涉及維護Algarve 地區飲用水廠、維護污水和排水系統及管理幾家私人公司的回收中心和廢水存儲系統的合約。這次交易是中國公司在環境業務領域規模最大的對外投資。北控水務集團在中國的業務涉及污水處理、水處理、海水淡化工廠的建設、運營和維護，以及自來水的分配和銷售。

State Grid’s acquisition of a 41.4% equity stake and staple loan notes in ElectraNet | 國家電網入股澳洲電力供應商 ElectraNet 41.4%股權及購買主要貸款票據 Linklaters | 年利達律師事務所 State Grid | 國家電網 Allens | 安德慎律師事務所 State Grid | 國家電網 State Grid International Development acquired a 41.11% equity stake as well as certain loan notes stapled to that equity in ElectraNet at the end of 2012. ElectraNet is the principal transmission network service provider in South Australia that manages and operates the regulated electricity transmission network in that state. The transaction involved multiple regulatory approvals and clearances in China (SASAC, NDRC and MOFCOM) and Australia (FIRB approval and ACCC clearance). Completion mechanism was adjusted to accommodate various approvals and clearances. The sale and purchase agreement included a heavily negotiated tax indemnity clause which deals with the on-going investigation by the Australian Taxation Office of certain Target company past tax treatments and concessions.

102

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

2012 年底，國家電網國際發展有限公司收購了澳洲電力供應商ElectraNet 公司 41.11% 的股權以及相應的貸款票據。ElectraNet 是南澳大利亞州主要的電力傳輸服務提供商，負責管理和運營該州的監管電力傳輸網絡。此次交易獲得中澳多個監管部門的批准和許可（涉及中國國資委、國家發改委和商務部，以及澳大利亞的外國投資審查委員會和澳洲競爭及消費者委員會）。補全機制也根據各項批准和許可作出了調整。買賣協議包括經過深入協商的稅金賠償條款，該條款適用於澳大利亞稅務局正在進行調查中的目標公司過去稅收處理和減免問題的情況。

Equity | 股票市場 Zhengzhou Coal Mining Machinery IPO in Hong Kong | 鄭州煤礦機械香港首次公開募股 Baker & McKenzie | 貝克•麥堅時國際律師事務所 Zhengzhou Coal Mining Machinery | 鄭州煤礦機械

Zhong Lun Law Firm | 中倫律師事務所 Zhengzhou Coal Mining Machinery | 鄭州煤礦機械

Khaitan & Co Zhengzhou Coal Mining Machinery | 鄭州煤礦機械

Clifford Chance | 高偉紳律師事務所 Underwriters | 承銷商 Jia Yuan Law Offices | 嘉源律師事務所 Underwriters | 證券包銷商

Before its Hong Kong IPO, which took place in December last year, Zhengzhou Coal already had A shares listed in Shanghai. This meant that the application to list its H shares in Hong Kong had to be planned carefully to comply with disclosure requirements applicable to the company under PRC regulations. One of the biggest challenges was pricing, as the A shares were already trading and CSRC regulations state that new shares of mainland-listed firms must not be sold overseas at a discount of more than 10% of their valuation in the mainland. The deal was worth US$296 million and closed in December last year. Zhengzhou Coal is one of the leading coal mining and excavation equipment manufacturers in China. It is a provincial government-controlled firm based in Zhengzhou, the capital of Hunan Province. The company intends to use the proceeds of the offering to fund expansion in Russia and India. 鄭州煤礦機械去年 12 月在中國香港進行首次公開募股前，已在上海發行 A 股股票。這意味著鄭州煤礦申請在香港發行 H 股股票時必須細心籌劃，以遵守中國法規對公司披露的要求。其面臨的最大挑戰之一是定價問題，因為 A 股股票已開始交易，且中國證券監督管理委員會規定內地上市公司的新股在海外的售價不得低於其內地估價的 90% 。鄭州煤礦此次籌集了 2.96 億美元資金，並在去年 12 月完成交易。鄭州煤礦是中國領先的煤炭開採和挖掘設備製造商之一。該公司由省政府控股，總部位於河南省的省會鄭州。公司計劃將股票發行收益用於擴展俄羅斯和印度市場。

入圍名單

CIMC Shenzhen B-share to H-share relocation | 中國國際海運集裝箱集團“B 股轉 H 股” Commerce & Finance Law Offices | 通商律師事務所 CIMC | 中國國際海運集裝箱集團

Paul Hastings | 普衡律師事務所 CIMC | 中國國際海運集裝箱集團

Jingtian & Gongcheng | 競天公誠律師事務所 Guotai Junan Capital Ltd. | 國泰君安融資有限公司

Woo Kwan Lee & Lo | 胡關李羅律師行 Guotai Junan Capital Ltd. | 國泰君安融資有限公司

China International Marine Containers’ (CIMC) migration of its Shenzhenlisted B-shares to H-shares hit the headlines as the deal that could prompt more companies to move from listings from China’s illiquid B-share market to the vibrant H-share market. The relocation required China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) approval and several steps to circumvent regulations restricting PRC shareholders from holding H-shares. CIMC provided a cash offer via the Shenzhen Stock Exchange’s (SZSE) trading system for PRC investors that may have not wanted to hold H-shares, and established a nominee shareholder for those who wanted to keep their CIMC shares. As part of the transaction, a bridge between the Hong Kong Stock Exchange’s and SZSE’s trading platforms was also set up so that PRC investors could seamlessly send trading instructions. 中國國際海運集裝箱（集團）股份有限公司 (CIMC) 將其深圳上市的 B 股股票轉為 H 股，這將促使更多公司將股票從中國流動性較差的 B 股市場轉至充滿活力的港股市場，該事件因此成為頭條新聞。股票的轉換不僅需要得到中國證券監督管理委員會的批准，還需要採取多個步驟以規避用於限制中國股東持 H 股股票的監管法規。通過深交所的交易系統，中集集團向可能不想持有 H 股股票的中國投資者提供了現金要約，並為仍想要持有中集集團股票的投資者選擇了代理股東。作為交易的一部分，香港交易所和深圳證券交易所之間也嫁接得很好，便於中國投資人無障礙地操作交易指令。

PICC IPO in Hong Kong | 中國人保香港首次公開募股 Davis Polk & Wardwell | 達維律師事務所 PICC | 中國人保

King & Wood Mallesons | 金杜律師事務所 PICC | 中國人保

Slaughter & May | 司力達律師事務所 Underwriters | 承銷商

Sullivan & Cromwell | 蘇利文•克倫威爾律師事務所 Underwriters | 承銷商

Jun He | 君合律師事務所 Underwriters | 承銷商 The People’s Insurance Company of China’s (PICC’s) challenging December IPO had 17 underwriters: the most ever recorded for an IPO. But the large amount of banks on the deal meant that there was also enormous interest from cornerstone investors. Altogether PICC IPO had 18 cornerstone investors. These included AIG, Fosun International and State Grid Yingda International Holdings and took up 58% of the total public offering. However, adding to the transaction’s complexity, China Life Insurance Company came in after the public offering began. In a market first, a supplemental prospectus was therefore issued to notify investors of China Life’s participation. This was the first time a deal has added a new cornerstone after the public offering has launched.

年度獎項

中國人民保險集團股份有限公司 (PICC) 12 月在香港的首次公開募股有17 名承銷商：這個數字是IPO有史以來數量之最。不過，交易中有大量的來自銀行的投資意味著這比發行獲得眾多的基石投資者的興趣。中國人保首次公開募股共獲得了 18 家基石投資者的認購。其中包括美國國際集團(AIG)、復星國際有限公司和國家電網英大集團，這些基石投資者認購了總公開發行股票的 58%。而另一保險公司中國人壽保險公司在公開發行後也認購了股票，使交易變得更加複雜。人保因此立刻向市場發佈了補充招股說明書，通知各投資者中國人壽保險公司的股票認購情況。這也是股票上市中首次出現公開發行股票後加入新基石投資者的現象。

Shanghai Fosun Pharmaceutical IPO in Hong Kong | 上海復星醫藥香港首次公開募股 Morrison & Foerster | 美富律師事務所 Shanghai Fosun Pharmaceutical | 復星醫藥

Herbert Smith Freehills | 史密夫律師事務所 Underwriters | 承銷商

Grandall Law Firm | 國浩律師事務所 Underwriters | 承銷商 Chen & Co | 瑛明律師事務所 Shanghai Fosun Pharmaceutical | 復星醫藥 This US$512 million listing on the Hong Kong stock exchange in October last year was not only the biggest IPO of a pharmaceutical company since June 2011, but also the first significant listing in HK since mid-2012. Shanghai Fosun Pharmaceutical is a medical products maker and a unit of Fosun International, one of China’s largest conglomerates. The business has been listed in Shanghai since 1998, which increased the level of complexity of the deal as it involved dealing with overlapping legal regimes as well as different regulatory authorities. The company also had to deal with adverse market conditions. To increase the chances of success, Fosun Pharmaceutical secured cornerstone investments of US$50 million from Prudential Insurance and $25 million from International Finance Corp, the private sector lending arm of the World Bank. Both investors committed to hold the stock for six months. On October 30, 336 million shares were sold at HK$11.80 (US$1.52). This was a 9.9% discount on the 20-day average of its Shanghai stock price – within the 10% discount range permitted by Chinese regulators. 上海復星醫藥去年 10 月在香港證券交易所發行了 5.12 億美元的股票，這不僅是自 2011 年 6 月以來最大的醫藥公司首次公開募股，也是 2012 年中旬後香港首次重要的股票發行。上海復星醫藥不僅是醫藥產品製造商，還是中國最大的綜合型企業之一復星國際的子公司。復星醫藥 1998 年在上海上市，由於需要受交疊的法律制度和各種監管部門制約，交易的複雜程度也隨之提高。此外，公司還需要應對當時總體不太好的資本市場的狀況。為了增加成功機會，復星醫藥爭取到了基石投資者：其中英國保誠保險認購 5000 萬美元的股票，世界銀行旗下私營貸款機構國際金融公司(IFC)認購了 2500 萬美元的股票。兩位投資者都承諾買進後將持有復星醫藥股票六個月。掛牌交易當日，復星醫藥以每股 11.80 港元（1.52 美元）的價格售出 3.36 億股的股票。此價格比復星醫藥在上海股市 20 天內的平均股票價格低了 9.9%，但沒有超出中國監管機構允許的折扣範圍 (10%)。

中國法律商務2013年回顧

103

Annual Awards

NOMINATIONS

Inner Mongolia Yitai Coal IPO in Hong Kong | 內蒙古伊泰煤炭香港首次公開募股 Clifford Chance | 高偉紳律師事務所 Inner Mongolia Yitai Coal | 伊泰煤炭

Sullivan & Cromwell | 蘇利文·克倫威爾律師事務所 China Telecom | 中國電信

Jingtian & Gongcheng | 競天公誠律師事務所

Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer | 富而德律師事務所

Inner Mongolia Yitai Coal | 伊泰煤炭

China Telecom | 中國電信

Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer | 富而德律師事務所

Jingtian & Gongcheng | 競天公誠律師事務所

Underwriters | 承銷商

China Telecom | 中國電信

Jia Yuan Law Offices | 嘉源律師事務所 Underwriters | 承銷商

Inner Mongolia Yitai Coal was the first B-share company to successfully complete a Hong Kong IPO. Inner Mongolia Yitai Coal, a Chinese coal-mining company based in Inner Mongolia, raised $903 million, with seven cornerstone investors such as Datang International and Baosteel Resources International taking up 43% of the offering. The deal signaled that Chinese companies are moving away from the B-share market to take advantage of Hong Kong’s more mature equity markets. Although A-share companies have also had H-shares for several years – often with price discrepancies – the movement of B-share companies to the Hong Kong market via either additional public shares or a complete migration is predicted to be a trend in the next year. 內蒙古伊泰煤炭股份有限公司是首家在中國香港成功完成首次公開募股的原B 股上市公司。內蒙古伊泰煤炭股份有限公司是一家總部設在內蒙古自治區的中國煤炭開採公司，此次上市共募得 9.03 億美元，其中大唐國際和寶鋼資源等共七大基石投資者認購了總發行的 43%。該交易的達成意味著中國的上市企業正從 B 股市場不斷轉向中國香港，以利用其更加成熟的股票市場。雖然近幾年來 A 股市場的上市公司也持有 H 股股票（往往存在股價差異），但是無論是通過增發新股還是完全轉股(從B股轉H股)，預計 B 股上市公司轉往香港市場會成為未來幾年的趨勢。

Mergers & Acquisitions | 兼並收購 HSBC’s 9.4 billion sale of Ping An Insurance | 匯豐銀行以 94 億美元出售平安保險股份 Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer | 富而德律師事務所 HSBC | 匯豐銀行

This deal’s value amounted to US$13.3 billion and was the largest telecoms transaction in the PRC in 2012. In terms of public disclosure requirements on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange, the asset appraisal and property appraisal became a very important area to be disclosed in order for the investors to make an informed decision on the acquisition, given the importance of the title and ownership of the relevant assets. The various rounds of discussions with the Hong Kong Stock Exchange on the substance, extent and format of disclosures, particularly on disclosures of asset appraisal and property valuation, with references to different requirements under the Hong Kong Listing Rules were one of the most challenging tasks in completing the deal. This transaction brings substantial benefits to China Telecom in terms of cost saving and maximised efficiency to operate the CDMA business and network concurrently. China Telecom, a leading telecommunication company in China, is listed on both Hong Kong Stock Exchange and New York Stock Exchange. 本次交易金額總計達 133 億美元，是中國 2012 年達成的最大宗電信交易。根據香港證券交易所公開披露要求，為使投資者在收購階段能作出正確的判斷，資產評估及房產評估是應披露的重要方面（考慮到相關資產的項目名和所有權的被披露的重要性）。參考香港上市規定的不同要求，中國電信針對披露的內容、範圍及形式，特別是資產評估和房產評估方面與香港證券交易所進行了多輪商談，在達成交易的整個過程中，這堪稱是最具挑戰性的工作。交易達成後，中國電信在節約成本的同時，能夠最大限度地提高 CDMA 業務和網絡的運營效率，對公司來說，將獲得巨大收益。中國電信是中國領先的電信公司，同時在香港證券交易所和紐約證券交易所掛牌上市。

Ping An’s sale of Yihaodian to Wal-Mart | 平安保險集團將一號店股份出售給沃爾瑪

Clifford Chance | 高偉紳律師事務所 China Development Bank | 國家開發銀行

DLA Piper | 歐華律師事務所 Ping An Insurance | 平安保險

Linklaters | 年利達律師事務所 Charoen Pokphand | 正大集團

Morrison & Foerster | 美富律師事務所

This deal is the biggest overseas acquisition to date by a Thai company. The deal is structured with HSBC’s stake to be sold in two tranches involving four purchasers, all of which are wholly-owned subsidiaries of Charoen Pokphand. HSBC’s sale represented 15.57% of the issued share capital of Ping An Insurace. The deal was unusual in that it involved two non-Chinese entities selling and purchasing a significant stake in a Hong Kong-listed company with a regulated business in China, part of which required PRC regulatory approval. The aggregate purchase price for the Shares is HK$72,736m, equivalent to HK$59.00 per share, payable in cash. 本交易是迄今為止泰國公司達成的最大宗海外收購。在本次交易中，匯豐銀行分兩次將股份出售給四家公司，這四家公司均為泰國正大集團的全資子公司。匯豐銀行所出售的股份相當於平安保險已發行股本的 15.57%。本交易不同尋常之處在於：涉及到兩家非中國企業買賣一家香港上市公司的重要份額的股份，而該上市公司在中國大陸經營需監管的業務，需經過中華人民共和國監管機構的審批。上述股份以現金支付，總收購價為 727.36 億港元，相當於每股 59.00 港元。

104

China Telecom’s acquisition of CDMA Network Assets for $13.4 billion | 中國電信以 134 億美元收購 CDMA 網絡資產

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

Wal-Mart | 沃爾瑪

King & Wood Mallesons | 金杜律師事務所 Wal-Mart | 沃爾瑪

T&D Associates | 天地和律師事務所 Anti-monopoly filing | 負責交易中的反壟斷文件申請

Jun He | 君合律師事務所 Ping An Insurance | 平安保險 Yohaodian is a fast growing e-commerce business with over 24 millions users in China. Wal-Mart purchased Yihaodian from Ping An for US$700,000,000 in two phases. The transaction dealt with the financing need of the company where a bridge loan was provided both in the form of an onshore entrustment loan and an offshore convertible note. The relationship between anti-monopoly filing and the existing VIE structure was also carefully examined with this reflected in the restructuring plan whereby the VIE structure was dismantled without affecting

@CLP_editorial

Access the legal professionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s most trusted guide to China n Full translations of PRC laws with English and Chinese side-by-side

n Online database contains 25 years of translations, in-depth articles and opinion

CLP e-alerts: n Weekly e-mail including in-depth analysis, latest translations and legislation roundup

n Monthly roundup of all translations and analysis articles that have been uploaded

Visit chinalawandpractice.com today for more information and to start your free trial Enquiries: vishal.mahtani@euromoneyasia.com +852 2842 6929

Annual Awards

NOMINATIONS

the operation of Yihaodian. The transaction was highly complex and sensitive with issues spanning over a number of practice areas. It is believed this is the first transaction where the Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) formally referred to the VIE structure which has been a highly controversial corporate structure commonly used in e-commerce operations in China. 一號店是一家發展迅速的電子商務企業，在中國的用戶已超過了 2,400 萬。沃爾瑪以 7 億美元的價格分兩個階段從平安保險集團手中購得一號店。在本交易中，沃爾瑪同時以在岸委託貸款和離岸可換股票據兩種形式向平安保險集團提供過渡性貸款，以解決該公司的融資需求。中華人民共和國商務部根據該重組計劃所反映的結果對反壟斷提案和現有可變利益實體 (VIE) 結構之間的關係進行了仔細審查，並由此禁止沃爾瑪利用 VIE 結構，以免影響一號店的運營。本交易涵蓋多個業務領域的不同問題，因此極其複雜而又高度敏感。在此次交易中，中華人民共和國商務部 (MOFCOM) 首次正式引用 VIE 結構，該結構是一種極具爭議性的公司結構，通常用於中國的電子商務運營。

Alibaba repurchase of 20% stake from Yahoo | 阿里巴巴回購雅虎 20% 股份 Allen & Overy | 安理國際律師事務所 China Development Bank | 國家開發銀行

Conyers Dill & Pearman | 康德明律師事務所 Yahoo! | 雅虎

Fenwick & West | 泛偉律師事務所 Alibaba Group | 阿里巴巴 Fangda Partners | 方達律師事務所 Alibaba Group | 阿里巴巴

Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer | 富而德律師事務所 Alibaba Group | 阿里巴巴

King & Wood Mallesons | 金杜律師事務所 Eight investment banks | 8間投資銀行

Maples and Calder | 邁普達律師事務所 Alibaba Group | 阿里巴巴

hiSoft and VanceInfo merge | 兩美國上市企業海輝軟件和文思信息合併

Softbank | 軟銀

Conyers Dill & Pearman | 康德明律師事務所

Munger Tolles & Olson

VanceInfo | 文思信息

Yahoo! board of directors | 雅虎董事會

Fangda Partners | 方達律師事務所

Paul Weiss Rifkind Wharton & Garrison | 寶維斯律師事務所

hiSoft | 海輝軟件

Silver Lake, Temasek | 銀湖資本，淡馬錫

King & Wood Mallesons | 金杜律師事務所

Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom | 世達國際律師事務所

VanceInfo | 文思信息

Yahoo! | 雅虎

Maples and Calder | 邁普達律師事務所 hiSoft | 海輝軟件

Sullivan & Cromwell | 蘇利文•克倫威爾律師事務所 CIC International, CITIC Captial, Boyu Capital | 中投，中信資本，博裕資本

Orrick Herrington & Sutclife | 奧睿律師事務

Wachtell Lipton Rosen & Katz

VanceInfo | 文思信息

Alibaba Group | 阿里巴巴

Simpson Thacher & Bartlett | 盛信律師事務所

Walkers

hiSoft | 海輝軟件

Eight investment banks | 8間投資銀行

Sullivan & Cromwell | 蘇利文·克倫威爾律師事務所 Deal financial advisor | 交易之財務顧問

Weil Gotshal & Manges | 威嘉律師事務所

This merger has been dubbed a merger of equals by the media. VanceInfo and hiSoft shareholders will each own approximately 50% of Pactera Technology International – the combined entity’s new name. The merger is valued at US$875 million and is believed to have formed the largest China-based offshore IT services provider. VanceInfo was listed and traded on the NYSE while the stock of hiSoft was listed and traded on NASDAQ. This innovative transaction involved a complicated deal structure. To make a merger of equals, VanceInfo shareholders received one Pactera’s share (ADS) for each of VanceInfo’s share (ADS) immediately prior to the merger, then HiSoft did a reverse share split (share consolidation) and an adjustment of the ADS-to-share ratio from 1-to-19 to 1-to-1. 此次合併被媒體稱為對等合併。文思信息技術有限公司（以下簡稱為“文思”）和海輝軟件（國際）集團公司（以下簡稱為“海輝” ）的股東將分別獲得文思海輝創新技術有限公司（合併後的新企業名稱）約 50% 的股份。合併後新公司的總資產約為 8.75 億美元，並將成為中國最大的離岸 IT 服務提供商。文思在紐約證券交易所上市交易，而海輝則是在納斯達克上市的企業。這一創新型交易涉及的交易結構十分複雜。為達成對等合併，在合併前，文思的股東直接可按一股文思股票（美國存托股）兌一股新成立公司文思海輝股票（美國存托股）的比例進行，之後海輝進行股票反分割（股份合併），並將美國存托股與普通股的比率從 1:19 調整為 1:1。

106

Morrison & Foerster | 美富律師事務所

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

Yahoo! | 雅虎

White & Case | 偉凱律師事務所 Eight investment banks | 8間投資銀行 Chinese internet company, Alibaba Group, closed a series of large transactions this year. But the most innovative was its repurchase of half of Yahoo!’s stake, approximately $7.6 billion. Yahoo! purchased its 40% stake in Alibaba Group in 2005 for $1 billion, giving Alibaba the exclusive right to use the Yahoo! name in China. The initial repurchase of shares represented half of Yahoo!’s stake in Alibaba, bringing its ownership down to 20%. It was also agreed that Alibaba Group has the right to repurchase one-half of Yahoo!’s remaining stake following a qualifying initial public offering. Alibaba also paid Yahoo! a onetime $550 million payment regarding its technology and intellectual property license agreement. The deal required the restructuring of Alibaba’s relationship with Yahoo! and a $2 billion senior debt package, made up of a $1 billion term loan facility from eight banks as well as a $1 billion term loan facility from China Development Bank. The financing also involved the issuance of convertible preference shares and ordinary shares. Previous investors such as Temasek and private equity fund Silver Lake also increased their investment in Alibaba. The financing was the largest ever private financing package for a private sector Chinese company and represented the largest internet M&A transaction in the last decade. Alibaba Group’s repurchase of shares from Yahoo! was in process concurrently with the take-private of Alibaba.com off the Hong Kong Stock Exchange. It is

入圍名單

believed that following these two transactions, Alibaba Group is eyeing an IPO of the entire group sometime before 2015. 今年，中國的互聯網公司阿里巴巴集團達成了一系列的大宗交易。但最讓人想不到的是阿里巴巴以大約 76 億美元回購了雅虎所擁有的其半數股份。2005 年雅虎以 10 億美元購得阿里巴巴集團 40% 的股份，並向阿里巴巴授予雅虎品牌在中國的獨家使用權。回購完成後，雅虎對阿里巴巴的所有權將降至 20%。雙方還商定，若阿里巴巴未來上市成功，阿里巴巴有權優先回購雅虎持有的剩余的一半股份。同時，阿里巴巴還一次性支付雅虎技術和知識產權許可費共計 5.5 億美元。此次交易推動阿里巴巴和雅虎的關係重組，使得阿里巴巴的債務資金高達 20 億美元，其中 8 家銀行提供了 10 億美元的定期貸款，中國國家開發銀行則提供了另外 10 億美元定期貸款。此次融資還包括發行可轉換優先股以及普通股。先前的投資者淡馬錫和私募基金公司銀湖資本也增加了對阿里巴巴集團的投資。此次融資是中國私有企業有史以來數量最大的私募融資方案，也是過去 10 年來最大的互聯網相關的並購交易。阿里巴巴集團在對雅虎進行股份回購的同時，還在進行 Alibaba. com 的私有化工作並將其退出香港交易所。全部完成之後，阿里巴巴集團可能要在 2015 年前將整個集團上市。

Outbound | 對外投資 Bright Food’s acquisition of a 60% stake in Weetabix | 光明食品收購英國早餐穀物品牌Weetabix 60% 股份 Weil Gotshal & Manges | 威嘉律師事務所 Lion Capital

Linklaters | 年利達律師事務所 Bright Food | 光明食品 Mills & Reeves

年度獎項

大力推廣該品牌。總部位於上海的光明食品在 2010 年收購了新西蘭 Synlait Milt乳業的 51% 股份，並在 2011 年又收購了澳洲Manassen Foods食品集團的 87% 股份，之後就一直在尋找收購目標。

This was the first successful acquisition by a mainland Chinese bank of a controlling stake in a US bank, in this case the US subsidiary of the Bank of East Asia (BEA) – a Hong Kong bank. The purchase required the approval of the Federal Reserve Board. That approval was seen as a clear sign that it was likely to approve acquisitions by other Chinese banks of smaller US banks and future acquisitions by ICBC. It also made ICBC the first Chinese bank to obtain a decision from the Fed that it is subject to comprehensive and consolidated supervision (CCS) by its home country regulator – the China Banking Regulatory Commission. Although the deal was only US$140 million, it is likely to pave the way for far larger acquisitions in the future. ICBC, the largest bank in China with US$2.5 trillion in assets, is 70.7% owned by the Chinese government. 這是中國大陸銀行首次成功取得在美國的銀行的控股權，此實例中的美國銀行即香港東亞銀行 (BEA) 美國分行。本次收購獲得了美國聯邦儲備委員會的批准。這一批准明確表明：其他中國銀行也有機會獲准收購小型美國銀行，而中國工商銀行也有望在海外並購之路上走得更遠。這也使中國工商銀行成為首個令美聯儲信任及極大程度依賴當地國監管機構（即中國銀行業監督管理委員會）許可的中國銀行。雖然本次交易額僅僅是 1.4 億美元，但卻有望為日後更大宗的收購鋪平道路。中國工商銀行是中國本土最大的銀行，資產額高達 2.5 萬億美元，其中 70.7% 歸中國政府所有。

Weetabix

This £1.2 billion deal was one of the largest acquisitions by a Chinese company in the food and beverage sector. Bright Food, an SOE, acquired a 60% stake in the company with the other 40% to be held by Lion Capital for a further period. Private Equity firm Lion Capital bought Weetabix in 2004 and had been searching for a buyer. Both parties had to negotiate complex Chinese regulatory issues that would apply to the initial transaction and consider future exit arrangement. Weetabix, one of the largest producers of breakfast cereal in the UK, and has strong customer loyalty and exports to over 80 countries, which led to high media coverage of the transaction. Bright Foods is planning to expand the Weetabix brand in Asia, particularly in China. Shanghai based Bright Foods had been looking for acquisitions since 2010, when it bought a 51% stake in New Zealand’s Synlait Milt and an 87% stake in Manassen Foods Australia in 2011 這筆 12 億英鎊的交易是中國食品行業公司完成的最大宗收購之一。光明食品（集團）有限公司（以下簡稱“光明食品”）是一家國有企業，這次收購了英國早餐穀物品牌Weetabix的 60% 股份，而剩餘的 40% 股份將繼續由Lion Capital 持有。Lion Capital是一家私募基金公司，其在 2004 年收購了Weetabix，之後一直在尋找買方。雙方必須就這單交易可能涉及的一系列複雜的中國監管問題進行協商，並考慮未來繼續收購及轉讓計劃。作為英國最大的早餐穀物食品生產商之一，Weetabix擁有穩固的客戶來源，其產品遠銷 80 多個國家/地區，因此各家媒體均爭相報道本次交易。光明食品擬在亞洲，尤其在中國

Weichai Power’s stake in Germany’s KION Group and Linde Hydraulics | 濰柴動力入股德國凱傲集團及旗下林德液壓 Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer | 富而德律師事務所 KION | 德國凱傲

Gleiss Lutz KION | 德國凱傲

Hengeler Mueller | 恆樂律師事務所 Weichai Power | 濰柴動力 King & Wood Mallesons | 金杜律師事務所 Weichai Power | 濰柴動力

Paul Hastings | 普衡律師事務所 Weichai Power | 濰柴動力

Baker & McKenzie | 貝克·麥堅時國際律師事務所 Weichai Power | 濰柴動力 White & Case | 偉凱律師事務所 China Development Bank | 中國國家開發銀行 Weichai Power makes cars and equipment in China and is part of the Shandong Heavy Industry Group. It bought a 25% stake in KION Group, a maker of industrial trucks, and a 70% stake in KION’s hydraulics business, Linde Hydraulics. The €738

中國法律商務2013年回顧

107

Annual Awards

NOMINATIONS

million transaction was the largest direct investment in Germany by a Chinese company. Weichai bought the stakes from KION’s private equity owners Goldman Sachs and KKR. Of the €738 million, €467 million was paid to acquire its 25% stake in KION through a capital increase and €271 million paid to Linde Material Handling for the 70% stake in Linde Hydraulics. In July this year, KION listed on the Frankfurt Stock Exchange, at which point Weichai exercised its call option to increase its stake in KION to 30%. 濰柴動力股份有限公司（以下簡稱“濰柴動力”）在中國從事汽車和各種設備的生產製造，隸屬於山東重工集團。濰柴動力購買了德國工業叉車製造商凱傲集團的 25% 股份，以及凱傲旗下液壓企業林德液壓的 70% 股份。 7.38 億歐元的交易是中國公司在德國的最大一筆直接投資。濰柴動力從凱傲集團的私募股權持有機構高盛公司和 KKR 手中收購以上股份。在濰柴動力投入的 7.38 億歐元中，4.67 億歐元用於通過增資方式收購德國凱傲的 25% 股份，余下 2.71 億歐元支付給了林德物料搬運集團，以獲取林德液壓的 70% 股份。 2013年7 月，德國凱傲在法蘭克福證券交易所上市，濰柴動力當即行使其認購期權，使其持有的凱傲股份增加到 30%。

Private Equity | 私募股權 Focus Media’s $3.7 billion privatisation | 分眾傳媒 37 億美元私有化 Clifford Chance | 高偉紳律師事務所 Bank of America, China Development Bank, China Minsheng Bank, Citigroup, Credit Suisse, DBS Bank, Deutsche Bank, ICBC and UBS | 美銀、國家開發銀行、民生銀行、花旗、瑞信、星展、德意志銀行、中國工商銀行、瑞銀 Conyers Dill & Pearman | 康德明律師事務所 FountainVest Partners, Carlyle, CITIC Capital | 方源資本、凱雷集團、中信資本

Fangda Partners | 方達律師事務所 Special committee of Focus Media’s board | 董事會獨立委員會

Fried Frank | 法朗克律師事務所 FountainVest Partners, The Carlyle Group, CITIC Capital Partners, CDH Investments and China Everbright Limited and the Chairman of the Board and CEO of Focus Media | 方源資本、凱雷集團、中信資本、鼎暉投資、中國光大結構性投資控股有限公司、集團主席及分眾傳媒CEO

Kirkland & Ellis | 凱易律師事務所

BGI-Shenzhen in its acquisition of Complete Genomics | 深圳華大基因收購美國上市之全基因測序公司Complete Genomics

Maples and Calder | 邁普達律師事務所 Special committee of independent directors | 董事會獨立委員會

Jun He | 君合律師事務所 BGI-Shenzhen | 深圳華大基因

Morrison & Foerster | 美富律師事務所 Fosun International | 復星國際

Latham & Watkins | 瑞生律師事務所

Paul Weiss Rifkind Wharton & Garrison | 寶維斯律師事務所

Complete Genomics

Carlyle Group| 凱雷集團

O’Melveny & Myers | 美邁斯律師事務所

Ropes & Gray | 瑞格律師事務所 Carlyle Group | 凱雷集團

BGI-Shenzhen | 深圳華大基因

This is the first successfully completed acquisition by a Chinese buyer of a publicly traded US company. The transaction began as a public auction for Complete Genomics, a developer of DNA sequencing products that is listed on the Nasdaq. BGI-Shenzhen, a leading genomics organization, emerged as the winning bidder from the auction. The deal itself was worth US$117.6 million. BGI-Shenzhen used wholly owned subsidiary Beta Acquisition Corporation to make a cash tender offer, followed by a short form merger. The deal was announced in September last year but regulatory complexities, a hostile offer and shareholder lawsuits delayed closing until March 2013. The deal required regulatory approval in the US from the Committee on Foreign Investment in the US (CFIUS) and China’s MOFCOM, National Development and Reform Commission and State Administration of Foreign Exchange. BGI had to extend the tender offer several times while waiting for the US and Chinese regulatory approvals. 這是中國收購方首次成功地全資收購美國上市公司。此次收購源起於一次公開拍賣，競拍對象是在美國納斯達克上市的 DNA 測序產品開發商 Complete Genomics。技術領先的基因研究機構 - 深圳華大基因最終成為本次拍賣的中標人。本次交易以1.176 億美元達成。深圳華大基因通過其全資子公司 Beta Acquisition Corporation 向 Complete Genomics發出現金收購要約，然後對其進行了簡易合併。雙方早在去年 9 月便宣佈了此項交易，但之後由於監管複雜、且遇到另一美國公司惡意收購及股東訴訟等問題導致交易直到 2013 年 3 月才完成。本次交易需獲得美國方面來自美國外國投資委員會 (CFIUS) 以及中國方面來自中國商務部、國家發展與改革委員會及國家外匯管理局的監管審批。深圳華大基因在等待美國及中國監管機構審批期間，曾數次延長收購要約。

108

Special committee of independent directors | 董事會獨立委員會

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

Shearman & Sterling | 謝爾曼•思特靈律師事務所 JP Morgan | 摩根大通

Simpson Thacher & Bartlett| 盛信律師事務所 Focus Media | 分眾傳媒控股有限公司 Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom | 世達律師事務所 Chairman - Jason Jiang | 董事長 – 江南春

Sullivan & Cromwell | 蘇利文•克倫威爾律師事務所 Carlyle Group, CITIC Capital Partners, China Everbright Limited and FountainVest Partners | 凱雷集團、中信資本、中國光大結構性投資控股有限公司、方源資本 Walkers Syndicate of banks including Citibank, Bank of America Merrill Lynch, Credit Suisse, DBS Bank and others | 銀團包括花旗、美銀、瑞信、星展及其他

Weil Gotshal & Manges | 威嘉律師事務所 Citigroup, Credit Suisse | 花旗、瑞信

Zhong Lun Law Firm | 中倫律師事務所 Carlyle Group, FountainVest Partners, CITIC Capital and China Everbright Limited | 凱雷集團、方源資本、中信資本、中國光大結構性投資控股

Focus Media’s $3.7 billion take-private marked a number of firsts for Chinese M&A. Its value, number of parties involved, and heavily-negotiated documents mean that it’s likely to be a template for smaller take-privates going forward. Chairman Jason Jiang and the sponsors paid $27.50 per American Depositary Receipt (ADR), representing a 17.6% premium to the price of the company’s shares on August 10 2012, when the take-private offer was submitted. A consortium comprising both Chinese policy banks such as China Development Bank and international banks provided $1.525 billion in aggregate debt financing. The advertising conglomerate was the biggest US-listed China company take-private, biggest China leveraged

入圍名單

buyout (LBO), and the first China company to be taken private amid a Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) investigation. The deal garnered much publicity when short sellers such as Muddy Waters affected the company’s valuation and the rise of litigation risk following the decision to go private. But a lesser-known challenge arose from the number of parties involved. Between the private equity (PE) sponsors – including both Chinese firms and powerhouses such as Carlyle Group – as well as the banks and the founders, every document was heavily negotiated, possibly setting a template for future China company take-privates. 在美國上市的分眾傳媒價值37 億美元的私有化交易開創了中國並購歷史上的諸多“第一”。其價值、參與方數量以及深入協商的過程意味著它可能成為小規模私有化交易的典範。董事長江南春 (Jason Jiang) 和私募財團為每份美國存托憑證 (ADR) 支付了 27.50 美元，相比於 2012 年 8 月 10 日提交私有化要約時的公司股價溢價17.6% 。由中國國家開發銀行和眾多國際銀行組成的財團為項目融資提供了 15.25 億美元。分眾傳媒私有化完成了最大的在美上市中國公司私有化交易、最大的中國槓桿收購，也是首家在SEC進行調查過程同時進行私有化的中國公司。渾水公司 (Muddy Waters) 等做空者影響到了公司估值，且做出私有化決定後訴訟風險增加，此次交易因此獲得了不少關注。但是參與方數量帶來的挑戰卻幾乎不為人知。在私募投資人（包括中國公司和凱雷集團等強大集團）以及銀行和分眾的創始人之間，每份文件均經過反復協商，為未來中國公司私有化確立了典範。

Warburg Pincus Asia invests in China Auto Rental | 華平投資注資神州租車 Han Kun Law Offices | 漢坤律師事務所 China Auto Rental | 神州租車公司

Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom | 世達律師事務所 Warburg Pincus | 華平投資

New York-based private equity fund Warburg Pincus invested US$200 million to buy an undisclosed stake in privately-owned China Auto Rental. The investment was made through Series A preferred shares. The equity infusion follows China Auto Rental’s official withdrawal in late May 2012 of its registration with the SEC for an IPO that the company had at one time hoped would rake in up to $158 million. The company filed its registration for that offering in January but later postponed it, citing current capital market conditions, before withdrawing completely. The deal is part of a continuing trend of private equity firms looking for investment opportunities in companies seeking capital because of the IPO markets being closed. According to China Auto Rental, this was the largest ever equity financing deal in the car rental industry. China Auto Rental was founded in 2007 with an aim toward replicating car rental companies in more developed markets. 總部位於紐約的私募基金華平投資集團投資了2 億美元於中國私企神州租車公司，投資的股權比例未公開。該投資是通過第一批優先股的方式實現的。神州租車公司 2012 年 5 月底正式撤銷在美國首次公開募股的請求，當時該公司希望通過首次公開募股迅速籌集到 1.58 億美元，這次集資尾隨其後。該公司於2012年1月份提交了註冊申請，但當時的資本市場情況不佳，所以該公司申請了延期，最後完全撤銷了上市要求。由於首次公開募股市場低迷，私募股權公司開始在招股公司中尋求投資機會，該案例反映了這一持續趨勢。神州租車公司稱，這是租車行業有史以來最大的股權融資交易。神州租車公司成立於 2007 年，效仿較發達市場的汽車租賃公司開展業務。

年度獎項

Fushi Copperweld’s going private transaction | 雙金屬製造商傅氏科普威的私有化交易 Fangda Partners | 方達律師事務所 Abax Global Capital | 盤實資本

Shearman & Sterling | 謝爾曼•思特靈律師事務所 Bank of America Merrill Lynch | 美銀美林

Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom | 世達律師事務所 Chairman | 董事長

Weil Gotshal & Manges | 威嘉律師事務所 Abax Global Capital | 盤實資本

Beijing-based Fushi Copperweld was bought out by Abax Global Capital and its chairman and co-chief executive officer. Under the terms of the deal, which closed on December 27 2012, all Fushi shareholders who were not members of the buyout group received $9.50 in cash for each share of Fushi common stock. Abax Global Capital is a leading Asia-based alternative investment manager. Fushi Copperweld is a Nasdaq-listed leading Chinese manufacturer. Fushi is one of the two Nevada incorporated US-listed Chinese businesses going private since 2010. The founder had listed the company through a reverse merger rather than through the traditional route of an IPO. Because of this, there were issues unique to this take private transaction which made it more complex than the other Cayman-based take private transactions. 總部位於北京的傅氏科普威已由公司董事長兼首席執行官聯合盤實資本買下全部股權。根據 2012 年 12 月 27日達成的交易條款，所有非收購團體成員的傅氏集團股東均收到每股傅氏普通股 9.50 美元折合的現金。盤實資本是一家總部位於亞洲的私墓基金。傅氏科普威是納斯達克上市的雙金屬銅包鋼線的製造商。傅氏集團是自2010年起兩家於內華達州註冊美國上市的進行私有化的中國公司之一。該公司創始人早前通過反向並購而非傳統的首次公開募股途徑完成公司上市。因此，此次私有化過程存在一些特殊的問題，導致其比其他開曼註冊公司的私有化交易更加複雜。

Carlyle exits China Pacific Insurance | 凱雷集團退出中國太平洋保險公司 Allen & Overy | 安理國際律師事務所 Carlyle Group | 凱雷集團

Linklaters | 年利達律師事務所 The Carlyle Group, by way of block trades, disposed of its last interests in China Pacific Insurance for around $792 million. The deal involved a placing down in an HK listed company and involved HK securities law and China regulatory issues. This last share sale would bring Carlyle Group’s total return on its investment in China Pacific to around $5.2 billion, according to the Wall Street Journal. Carlyle had invested a total of $740 million in China Pacific in 2005 and 2007. In this last exit, Carlyle sold around 203 million shares or 7.3% of China Pacific’s Hong Kong-listed shares for HK$30.0-HK$30.3 a share. The range represents a discount of 2.3%3.2% from China Pacific’s closing price of HK$31.0 on January 5 2013.

中國法律商務2013年回顧

109

Annual Awards

NOMINATIONS

凱雷集團通過大宗交易出售了其在中國太平洋保險公司持有的剩餘股份，價值約為 7.92 億美元。此項交易涉及一家香港上市公司的減持，同時還涉及香港證券法和中國監管問題。據《華爾街日報》報道，通過出售剩餘持股，凱雷集團對中國太平洋保險公司的投資獲得的總回報達 52 億美元。凱雷集團於 2005 年和 2007 年共向中國太平洋保險公司投資 7.4 億美元。在此次最後退出中，凱雷以每股 30.030.3 港元的價格出售了中國太平洋保險公司的香港上市股權的 7.3% ，共約 2.03 億股。此價格比中國太平洋保險公司 2013 年 1 月 5 日的收盤價 31.0 港元低 2.3%-3.2%。

China Development Bank financed €350 million for a 300MW mine mouth coal fired power plant in Stanari, Republic of Srpska, Bosnia and Herzegovina. The sponsors are EFT (an Eastern European energy trading group based in Serbia) and the EPC and O&M contractor is Dongfang Electrical Corporation (based in Sichuan China).The financing is covered by Sinosure political risk insurance. Coal is sourced from the project company’s own mines. The offtaker of the electricity will be a sister company of the project company which will then on-sell a proportion of the power to Alpiq (the Swiss based energy group) and sell the remainder into the market. The project represents a first on many levels: the first large scale power project constructed by Chinese contractors in Europe, the first project financing for a concession in the Republic of Srpska and the first financing to fall into China’s dedicated fund for infrastructure projects in Eastern and Central Europe. The project is also one of the largest ever IPPs in South Eastern Europe. Three pieces of Bosnian legislation were amended to overcome Bosnian legal constraints and enable a project financing structure to be possible. 中國國家開發銀行對位於波黑塞族共和國北部小鎮斯坦納瑞的 300 兆瓦燃煤火力電廠融資 3.5 億歐元。總承包商為EFT（總部位於塞爾維亞的東歐能源貿易集團）和 EPC，運營與維護承包商為中國東方電氣集團公司（總部位於中國四川）。本融資的保險由中國出口信用保險公司政治風險保險負責。煤炭是從本項目公司的自有礦場開採的。購電方將是本項目公司的姐妹公司，會將一部分電力轉售給阿爾匹克（總部位於瑞士的能源集團）並將剩餘部分銷。本項目在多方面開創了先河：由中國承包商在歐洲建立的首個大規模電力項目；在塞族共和國獲得特許權的首個項目融資；以及屬於中國在東歐和中歐地區基礎設施項目專項資金的首次融資。本項目也是東南歐有史以來最大的非公有發電項目之一。有三條波斯尼亞法規經過了修訂，用以免除波斯尼亞法律限制，使項目融資結構得以實現。

Asian Development Bank financing to Dynagreen for waste-toenergy project facility | 亞洲開發銀行對綠色動力集團的廢物再生能源項目的融資 Allen & Overy | 安理國際律師事務所 Dynagreen Environmental Protection Group | 綠色動力環保集團

Global Law Office | 環球律師事務所 Asian Development Bank | 亞洲開發銀行

Shearman & Sterling | 謝爾曼思特靈律師事務所 Asian Development Bank | 亞洲開發銀行

This deal was a waste to energy projects facility agreement between Asian Development Bank as the lender, Dynagreen Environmental Protection Group as the borrower and Beijing State-owned Assets Management as guarantor. Dynagreen will use the Asian Development Bank’s loan to set up nine plants with a daily capacity to convert up to 6300 tonnes of municipal solid waste into electricity. Dynagreen employs a technology which does not require coal as a supplemental fuel to burn the waste. The sites are designed to use clean technologies and will together generate some 610 GWH of power by 2018 and will cut greenhouse gas emissions by around 450000 tonnes a year, according to the Bank’s website. The funding was provided in renminbi, which remains an uncommon currency from offshore lenders to PRC companies as US$ are more commonly used. 本次交易是由亞洲開發銀行（貸方）、綠色動力環保集團（借方）以及北京市國有資產經營有限責任公司（擔保方）三方之間簽訂的廢物再生能源項目設施協議。綠色動力將使用亞洲開發銀行的貸款建立九間工廠，每天能將多達 6300噸的城市固體廢物轉變為電能。綠色動力採用的技術無需以煤炭作為附加燃料來焚燒廢物。根據亞洲開發銀行網站的信息，項目旨在採用清潔能源技術，預計至 2018 年總共將產生約 610 千兆瓦時的電能，並且每年減少溫室氣體排放約 45萬噸。本融資所用的貨幣是人民幣，與離岸貸方面向中國公司常用的美元相比，仍屬於不常用的貨幣。

China Development Bank financing to Ecuador infrastructure projects | 國家開發銀行對厄瓜多爾基礎設施的項目融資 Run Ming Law Office | 潤明律師事務所 China Development Bank | 中國國家開發銀行

Hogan Lovells | 霍金路偉律師事務所 Ecuadorian parties | 厄瓜多爾各方

Milbank Tweed Hadley & McCloy | 美邦律師事務所 China Development Bank | 中國國家開發銀行 China Development was the sole lender in a US$2 billion sovereign loan to the Government of Ecuador for the development of infrastructure projects. The loan included US dollar, renminbi and Euro tranches. It was supported by the proceeds received from the state oil company PetroEcuador in connection with the sales of crude oil and fuel oil to Chinese oil companies PetroChina International Company and Unipec Asia. The transaction presented increased complexity after the initial loan documents were signed in September 2012 because the deal needed to be restructured as a result of an adverse arbitration award being granted to an international oil company against the Government of Ecuador. The transaction was innovatively structured to accommodate unique characteristics of Ecuadorian and Chinese law. 中國國家開發銀行作為唯一貸方，向厄瓜多爾政府提供 20億美元的主權國貸款，用於開發基礎設施項目。這筆貸款分為美元、人民幣和歐元三部分。項目融資由厄瓜多爾國家石油公司向中石油國際公司和

110

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

入圍名單

中國石化全資控股子公司Unipec Asia Co. Ltd銷售原油和燃油所得的收入支持。在 2012 年 9月簽署了初步貸款文件後交易情況變得複雜，因為某國際石油公司或判一項不利仲裁判決，導致貸款結構需要調整。該項目後經過了創新的調整，得以符合厄瓜多爾和中國兩國法律的獨有特徵。

Redevelopment of Columbia’s El Dorado International Airport | 哥倫比亞埃爾多拉多國際機場的再開發 Allen & Overy | 安理國際律師事務所 Borrower and sponsors | 借方和贊助商

Millbank Tweed Hadley & McCloy | 美邦律師事務所 Lenders | 貸方

China Development Bank, Inter-American Development Bank and Corporacion Andina de Fomento were all senior lenders in a in a syndicate of US$390 million to Sociedad Concesionaria Operadora Aeroportuaria Internacional for the US$1.1 billion redevelopment of the El Dorado international airport in Bogotá, Colombia. The transaction demonstrates the growing role China Development Bank is playing in the financing of complex infrastructure projects in Latin America and around the world. The transaction was also notable for being the first time the three lenders had collaborated on a project financing. The most important part of the transaction is the innovative security devices built around a restrictive trust structure required by the Government of Columbia. This creative security arrangement could become a model for future lending from a Chinese financial institution into Columbia or other Latin America countries. 中國國家開發銀行、美洲開發銀行和安第斯開發公司這三家高級借方為 Sociedad Concesionaria Operadora Aeroportuaria Internacional 聯合融資 3.9 億美元，用於哥倫比亞波哥大的埃爾多拉多國際機場的 11 億美元再開發項目。本交易表明，中國國家開發銀行在拉丁美洲和全球的基礎設施項目融資中扮演著越來越重要的角色。另外，本交易也是這三家貸方首次就同一項目融資展開合作，因此值得關注。本交易中最特別的部分在於，按照哥倫比亞政府的要求限制了信託結構的項目融資安全協議，這有可能成為將來中國金融機構對哥倫比亞或其他拉丁美洲國家/地區提供貸款的模板。

Real Estate & Construction | 房地產及建築 China Vanke’s JV with Tishman Speyer | 萬科與美國鐵獅門建合資公司 Allen & Overy | 安理國際律師事務所 China Vanke| 萬科

Gibson Dunn | 吉布森律師事務所 Tishman Speyer| 鐵獅門

This was the first investment in North America for China Vanke. The joint venture with Tishman Speyer saw the two companies acquires a 1.7 acre parcel of land located at 201 Folsom Street in San Francisco. The duo will develop a construct a residential luxury condominium project. The development will be managed by Tishman Speyer. The project will consist of two connected residential towers – 37 and 42 stories high – with a total of 655 residences. The joint venture with China Vanke expands Tishman Speyer’s relationship base in China, where it has raised funds successfully from Chinese investors and currently has approximately 20 million square feet at various stages in its development pipeline, according PR

年度獎項

Newswire. China Vanke was founded in 1984 in Shenzhen, the People’s Republic of China. It is currently the largest specialized residential property developer in the country. 這是萬科集團首次在北美市場試水。萬科集團與美國鐵獅門房地產公司建立了合資公司，並獲得美國舊金山富升街 201 地塊 (201 Folsom Street) 1.7 英畝土地的開發權。二者將在此共同開發豪華住宅項目。項目的開發由鐵獅門負責管理。據美通社介紹，此次項目為兩棟相連的高層住宅樓，其中一棟為 37 層，另一棟為 42 層，共計 655 套住宅。與萬科建立合資公司進一步拓展了鐵獅門在華市場的業務伙伴關係，此前鐵獅門已在中國投資者中成功募集資金，目前在中國擁有多個處於不同開發階段的房地產項目，面積約為 2,000 萬平方英尺。中國萬科集團 1984 年創建於中國深圳，是目前國內最大的專業住宅房地產開發商。

Yuexiu REIT purchased Guangzhou IFC from affiliate Yuexiu Property | 越秀 REIT 從越秀地產購得廣州 IFC Baker & McKenzie | 貝克麥堅時律師事務所 Yuexiu Group | 越秀集團

Conyers Dill & Pearman | 康德明律師事務所 REIT Manager | 房地產投資信託 (REIT) 經理

King & Wood Mallesons | 金杜律師事務所 Financial Advisors | 財務顧問

Latham & Watkins | 瑞生律師事務所 Financial Advisors | 財務顧問

Mayer Brown JSM | 孖士打律師行 REIT Trustee | 房地產投資信託 (REIT) 受託人

Zhong Lun Law Firm | 中倫律師事務所 Yuexiu REIT Asset Management Limited | 越秀房托資產管理有限公司

Yuexiu Group through the Yuexiu Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT) invested in Guangzhou International Finance Centre. The mixed-use commercial development comprises a shopping mall, a office building, a five-star hotel, luxury serviced apartments and car parks. The transaction was financed by way of bank financing (HK$2,980 million drawn down), proceeds from an international unit placement (net proceeds equal to HK$5,951 million) and issuance of consideration and deferred units to Yuexiu Property Company Limited. Total consideration payable by Yuexiu REIT in respect of the investment was approximately Rmb8.85 billion. The financing for the transaction was complex and novel, as unit holders only approved an indicative financing structure - certain safeguards (like a maximum DPU dilution condition) were introduced to ensure unit holders are protected while at the same time retaining flexibility for Yuexiu REIT. The deal also involved a number of other complex structural and regulatory issues. 越秀地產向越秀房地產投資信託基金 (REIT) 注入廣州地標性項目國際金融中心項目。該項目集購物中心、寫字樓、五星級酒店、豪華酒店式公寓和停車場於一體，是多用途發展模式的商業中心。此交易將通過提取銀行融資（29.80 億港元）、國際基金配售收益（款項淨額 59.51 億港元）、對越秀地產股份有限公司發行代價基金單位和遞延基金單位來付款。就該投資，越秀 REIT 應支付的總金額約為 88.5 億元人民幣。此次交易的支付方式複雜而新穎，原因在於基金持有人只批准了象徵性的融資結構 – 既要利用最高 DPU 稀釋條件等若干保障來確保基金持有人投資安全，又要保持越秀 REIT 的靈活性。除此之外，交易還涉及了許多其他複雜的融資結構和監管問題。

中國法律商務2013年回顧

111

Annual Awards

NOMINATIONS

Evergrande Real Estate’s top-up placement | 恆大地產先舊後新配售股份

Gazeley development for adidas | Gazeley 為阿迪達斯開發項目 Allen & Overy | 安理國際律師事務所

Morrison & Foerster | 美富律師事務所

Gazeley

Bank of America Merrill Lynch, Deutsche Bank, BOC Asia Limited | 美銀美林、德意志銀行和中銀國際亞洲有限公司

King & Wood Mallesons | 金杜律師事務所 Adidas | 阿迪達斯

Sidley Austin | 盛德律師事務所 Evergrande Real Estate | 恆大地產

This was the largest top-up placement for a Hong Kong-listed company this year, according to Dealogic data. The large-scale integrated Chinese residential property developer raised HK$4.35 billion from the top-up placement. Evergrande sold 1 billion shares, or about 6.7% of the company, at HK$4.35 each. The deal was marketed with a price range of HK$4.35 to HK$4.50, which represented a discount of between 3.2% and 6.5% to the closing price of HK$4.65 on the day. The deal came with an option to increase the size to 1.2 billion shares, although it was not exercised. Counsel worked on a tight timeline of only a few hours and the deal was executed through a competitive bidding mechanism designed to maximise the funds raised during the placement exercise. Due to the various investment banks involved, intensive negotiations were necessary to ensure that the documentation was able to meet each bank’s strict risk management standards. Evergrande said it plans to use the proceeds to repay debt and for general working capital purposes. 據研究機構Dealogic 的數據顯示，這是今年在中國香港上市的公司中規模最大的以先舊後新方式配售股份（top-up placement）的交易。中國大型綜合住宅物業開發商恆大地產從中籌得 43.5 億港元。恆大以每股 4.35 港元的價格配售了 10 億股股份，約佔公司已發行股本的 6.7%。交易的價格區間為每股 4.35 港元至 4.50 港元，較該股當日的收盤價 4.65 港元折價 6.5% 至 3.2%。該交易的另一方案是將配售股份增加至 12 億股，但是最終沒有採用。時間緊迫，交易律師只有幾個小時處理相關事宜。交易通過一套競標機制完成，能夠在配售期間最大限度地籌集資金。由於交易涉及多家投資銀行，為確保相關文件符合各家銀行嚴格的風險管理標準，交易期間展開了多場緊張的談判。恆大表示計劃將這筆收益用作債務償還資金和一般營運資金。

112

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

Adidas engaged global developer of logistics warehouses and distributions parks to manage the development of a high-tech, build to suit, logistics facility. The facility will accommodate adidas’ growing business in China. Under the arrangement, Gazeley is advising and managing all aspects of the process, including the acquisition of land, the establishment of the company which will own the facility, the engagement and supervision of third party contractors and consultants and the management of government relationships. The actual deal structure implemented and the allocation of risks and responsibilities between adidas and Gazeley is creative and novel. The structure will serve as framework for future agreements. The deal is worth Rmb237,128,392. 阿迪達斯雇用了全球物流倉庫和配送園區開發商Gazeley，以管理其高科技、定制建造的物流設施。該物流設施將為阿迪達斯在中國不斷增長的業務提供支持。根據安排，Gazeley負責全程全方位提供咨詢和管理服務，涉及收購土地、設施所屬公司的建立、第三方承包商和顧問的參與和監督以及政府關係的協調。實際執行的交易結構以及阿迪達斯與Gazeley之間風險和責任的分配富有創意而形式新穎。該結構還將成為未來各項協議的框架。這筆交易價值 237,128,392 元人民幣。

入圍名單

年度獎項

In-house teams of the year | 企業內部法律顧問團隊入圍名單 Chinese Company | 中國企業

Chinese Financial Institution | 中國金融機構

Alibaba Group | 阿里巴巴集團

Agricultural Development Bank of China | 中國農業發展銀行

Bright Food | 光明食品（集團）有限公司

Bank of China | 中國銀行

China Petrochemical Corporation (Sinopec) | 中國石油化工集團

China Development Bank | 國家開發銀行

China Telecom | 中國電信

Export-Import Bank of China | 中國進出口銀行

State Grid | 國家電網

ICBC | 中國工商銀行

teams of the year | 年度傑出律師團隊 China Banking & Finance | 銀行及融資 – 中國律所

International Banking & Finance | 銀行及融資 – 國際律所

Concord & Partners | 共和律師事務所

Allen & Overy | 安理國際律師事務所

Global Law Office | 環球律師事務所

Hogan Lovells | 霍金路偉律師事務所

Jincheng Tongda & Neal | 金誠同達律師事務所

Linklaters | 年利達律師事務所

Llinks Law Offices | 通力律師事務所

Milbank Tweed Hadley & McCloy | 美邦律師事務所

Run Ming Law Office | 潤明律師事務所

White & Case | 偉凱律師事務所

China Capital Markets | 資本市場 – 中國律所

International Capital Markets | 資本市場 – 國際律所

Commerce & Finance Law Offices | 通商律師事務所

Clifford Chance | 高偉紳律師事務所

Chen & Co | 瑛明律師事務所

Davis Polk & Wardwell | 達維律師事務所

Jingtian & Gongcheng | 競天公誠律師事務所

Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer | 富而德律師事務所

Jun He | 君合律師事務所

Linklaters | 年利達律師事務所

King & Wood Mallesons | 金杜律師事務所

Slaughter & May | 司力達律師事務所

Zhong Lun Law Firm | 中倫律師事務所

Sullivan & Cromwell | 蘇利文•克倫威爾律師事務所

China M&A | 兼並收購 – 中國律所

International M&A | 兼並收購 – 國際律所

Fangda Partners | 方達律師事務所

Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer | 富而德律師事務所

Jingtian & Gongcheng | 競天公誠律師事務所

Latham & Watkins | 瑞生律師事務所

Jun He | 君合律師事務所

Linklaters | 年利達律師事務所

King & Wood Mallesons | 金杜律師事務所

Simpson Thacher & Bartlett | 盛信律師事務所

Zhong Lun Law Firm | 中倫律師事務所

Slaughter & May | 司力達律師事務所 Weil Gotshal & Manges | 威嘉律師事務所

China Private Equity | 私募股權 – 中國律所

International Private Equity | 私募股權 – 國際律所

Boss & Young | 邦信陽律師事務所

Clifford Chance | 高偉紳律師事務所

Llinks Law Offices | 通力律師事務所

Kirkland & Ellis | 凱易國際律師事務所

Fangda Partners | 方達律師事務所

Paul Weiss Rifkind Wharton & Garrison | 寶維斯律師事務所

Han Kun Law Offices | 漢坤律師事務所

O’Melveny & Myers | 美邁斯律師事務所

Jingtian & Gongcheng | 競天公誠律師事務所

Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom | 世達律師事務所

中國法律商務2013年回顧

113

NOMINATIONS

Annual Awards

China Projects, Energy & Natural Resources 能源及自然資源項目 – 中國律所

International Projects, Energy & Natural Resources 能源及自然資源項目 – 國際律所

Broad & Bright | 世澤律師事務所

Baker & McKenzie | 貝克•麥堅時國際律師事務所

Dacheng Law Offices | 大成律師事務所

Herbert Smith Freehills | 史密夫律師事務所

Guantao Law Firm | 觀韜律師事務所

Norton Rose Fulbright | 諾頓羅氏律師事務所

King & Wood Mallesons | 金杜律師事務所

Vinson & Elkins | 文森•艾爾斯律師事務所

Zhong Lun Law Firm | 中倫律師事務所

White & Case | 偉凱律師事務所

Individual Awards | 年度律師 China Dealmaker | 傑出交易律師 – 中國律所

International Dealmaker | 傑出交易律師 – 國際律所

Xu Ping – King & Wood Mallesons | 金杜律師事務所

Chun Wei – Sullivan & Cromwell | 蘇利文•克倫威爾律師事務所

Jonathan Zhou – Fangda Partners | 方達律師事務所

Ji Zou – Allen & Overy | 安理國際律師事務所

Ma Hongli – Jun He | 君合律師事務所

Jun Wei – Hogan Lovells | 路偉律師事務所

David Yu – Llinks Law Offices | 通力律師事務所

Peter Huang –Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom | 世達律師事務所

Xusheng Zheng – Jingtian & Gongcheng | 競天公誠律師事務所

Tim Wang – Clifford Chance | 高偉紳律師事務所

Regional Firms of the year | 地區性律師事務所 Chongqing | 重慶

Qingdao |青島

Exceedon & Partners | 百君律師事務所

Shandong Deheng Law Firm | 山東德衡律師事務所

Solton & Partners | 索通律師事務所

Shandong Qindao Law Firm | 山東琴島律師事務所

Zhonghao Law Firm | 中豪律師事務所

Shandong Ya & Tai Law Firm | 山東亞和太律師事務所 Wincon Law Firm | 文康律師事務所

Guangzhou | 廣州 Alpha & Leader Law Firm | 安華理達律師事務所

Shenzhen | 深圳

C&I Partners | 信利盛達律師事務所

Jing Tian Law Firm | 經天律師事務所

Guangda Law Firm | 廣大律師事務所

Jingtian & Gongcheng | 競天公誠律師事務所

Wang Jing & Co | 敬海律師事務所

V&T Law Firm | 萬商天勤律師事務所 Zhong Yin Law Firm | 中銀律師事務所

Hangzhou | 杭州 Capital Equity Legal Group | 京衡律師事務所

Tianjin | 天津

High Mark Law Firm | 凱麥律師事務所

Mingzhou Law Firm | 明州律師事務所

Zhejiang T&C Law Firm | 浙江天冊律師事務所

Join & High Law Office | 四方君匯律師事務所 Tianjin Jinjianbaoqi Law Firm | 天津津建保企律師事務所

114

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

Winners Law Firm | 金諾律師事務所

入圍名單

年度獎項

China Competition | 競爭法 – 中國律所

International Competition | 競爭法 – 國際律所

AnJie Law Firm | 安傑律師事務所

Allen & Overy | 安理國際律師事務所

Broad & Bright | 世澤律師事務所

Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer | 富而德律師事務所

Fangda Partners | 方達律師事務所

Herbert Smith Freehills | 史密夫律師事務所

Jun He | 君合律師事務所

Linklaters | 年利達律師事務所

King & Wood Mallesons | 金杜律師事務所

Jones Day | 眾達律師事務所 O’Melveny & Myers | 美邁斯律師事務所

China Dispute Resolution | 爭議解決 – 中國律所

International Dispute Resolution | 爭議解決 – 國際律所

AllBright Law Offices | 錦天城律師事務所

Baker & McKenzie | 貝克•麥堅時國際律師事務所

Guantao Law Firm | 觀韜律師事務所

Clifford Chance | 高偉紳律師事務所

Jingtian & Gongcheng | 競天公誠律師事務所

Herbert Smith Freehills | 史密夫律師事務所

Fangda Partners | 方達律師事務所

Hogan Lovells | 霍金路偉律師事務所

King & Wood Mallesons | 金杜律師事務所

Mayer Brown JSM | 孖士打律師行 Sidley Austin | 盛德律師事務所

China Insurance | 保險 – 中國律所

International Insurance | 保險 – 國際律所

AnJie Law Firm | 安傑律師事務所

Baker & McKenzie | 貝克•麥堅時國際律師事務所

King & Wood Mallesons | 金杜律師事務所

Clifford Chance | 高偉紳律師事務所

Jun He | 君合律師事務所

Herbert Smith Freehills | 史密夫律師事務所

Wang Jing & Co | 敬海律師事務所

Hogan Lovells | 霍金路偉律師事務所

Wintell & Co | 瀛泰律師事務所

Mayer Brown JSM | 孖士打律師行 Sidley Austin | 盛德律師事務所

China Intellectual Property | 知識產權 – 中國律所

International Intellectual Property | 知識產權 – 國際律所

CCPIT Patent and Trademark Law Office | 中國國際貿易促進委員會專

Allen & Overy | 安理國際律師事務所

利商標事務所

China Patent Agent (HK) | 中國專利代理（香港）有限公司 King & Wood Mallesons | 金杜律師事務所 Liu Shen & Associates | 柳沈律師事務所 Unitalen Attorneys at Law | 集佳知識產權代理有限公司

Zhongzi Law Office | 中咨律師事務所

中國法律商務2013年回顧

115

Annual Awards

NOMINATIONS

China Labour & Employment 勞動及人力資源 – 中國律所

International Labour & Employment 勞動及人力資源 – 國際律所

Baohua Law Firm | 保華律師事務所

Baker & McKenzie | 貝克•麥堅時國際律師事務所

Fangda Partners | 方達律師事務所

Herbert Smith Freehills | 史密夫律師事務所

Jun He | 君合律師事務所

Hogan Lovells | 霍金路偉律師事務所

King & Wood Mallesons | 金杜律師事務所

Paul Hastings | 普衡律師事務所

TransAsia Lawyers | 權亞律師事務所

Simmons & Simmons | 西盟斯律師事務所

China Life Sciences | 生命科學 – 中國律所

International Life Sciences | 生命科學 – 國際律所

An Tian Zhang & Partners | 安倫律師事務所

Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer | 富而德律師事務所

Global Law Office | 環球律師事務所

Hogan Lovells | 霍金路偉律師事務所

Han Kun Law Office | 漢坤律師事務所

Ropes & Gray | 瑞格律師事務所

King & Wood Mallesons | 金杜律師事務所

Sidley Austin | 盛德律師事務所 Simmons & Simmons | 西盟斯律師事務所

China Real Estate & Construction 房地產及建築 – 中國律所

International Real Estate & Construction 房地產及建築 – 國際律所

AllBright Law Offices | 錦天城律師事務所

Allen & Overy | 安理國際律師事務所

Grandall Law Firm | 國浩律師事務所

Paul Hastings | 普衡律師事務所

Guantao Law Firm | 觀韜律師事務所

Hogan Lovells | 霍金路偉律師事務所

Jincheng Tongda & Neal | 金誠同達律師事務所

Mayer Brown JSM | 孖士打律師行

Zhong Lun Law Firm | 中倫律師事務所

Morrison & Foerster | 美富律師事務所 Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe | 奧睿律師事務所

China Shipping and Maritime | 貨運及海商 – 中國律所

International Shipping and Maritime | 貨運及海商 – 國際律所

Hai Tong & Partners | 海通律師事務所

Clyde & Co | 其禮律師事務所

Richard Wang & Co | 小耘律師事務所

Holman Fenwick Willan | 夏禮文律師行

Wang Jing & Co | 敬海律師事務所

Ince & Co | 英士律師事務所

Wintell & Co | 瀛泰律師事務所

Mayer Brown JSM | 孖士打律師行 Norton Rose Fulbright | 諾頓羅氏律師事務所

116

China Tax | 稅務 – 中國律所

International Tax | 稅務 – 國際律所

Hwuason Law Firm | 華稅律師事務所

Baker & McKenzie | 貝克•麥堅時國際律師事務所

Jun He | 君合律師事務所

Clifford Chance | 高偉紳律師事務所

King & Wood Mallesons | 金杜律師事務所

DLA Piper | 歐華律師事務所

Llinks Law Offices | 通力律師事務所

O’Melveny & Myers | 美邁斯律師事務所

Zhong Lun Law Firm | 中倫律師事務所

White & Case | 偉凱律師事務所

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

入圍名單

年度獎項

China TMT | 電信、傳媒及科技 – 中國律所

International TMT | 電信、傳媒及科技 – 國際律所

Dacheng Law Offices | 大成律師事務所

Bird & Bird | 鴻鵠律師事務所

Fangda Partners | 方達律師事務所

Baker & McKenzie | 貝克•麥堅時國際律師事務所

TransAsia Lawyers | 權亞律師事務所

Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer | 富而德律師事務所

Zhong Lun Law Firm | 中倫律師事務所

Paul Weiss Rifkind Wharton & Garrison | 寶維斯律師事務所 Sullivan & Cromwell | 蘇利文•克倫威爾律師事務所

China Trade | 國際貿易 – 中國律所

International Trade | 國際貿易 – 國際律所

Guantao Law Firm | 觀韜律師事務所

Baker & McKenzie | 貝克•麥堅時國際律師事務所

Jun He | 君合律師事務所

Covington & Burling | 科文頓•柏靈律師事務所

Hylands Law Firm | 浩天信和律師事務所

Mayer Brown JSM | 孖士打律師行

King & Wood Mallesons | 金杜律師事務所

White & Case | 偉凱律師事務所

Zhong Lun Law Firm | 中倫律師事務所

Offshore Firm of the Year | 年度離岸律師事務所

Hong Kong Firm of the Year | 年度香港律師事務所

Appleby

Deacons | 的近律師行

Conyers Dill & Pearman | 康德明律師事務所

Oldham Li & Nie | 高李嚴律師行

Maples and Calder | 邁普達律師事務所

Wilkinson & Grist | 高露雲律師行

Walkers

Woo Kwan Lee & Lo | 胡關李羅律師行

Japan Firm of the Year | 年度日本律師事務所

Korea Firm of the Year | 年度韓國律師事務所

Anderson Mori & Tomotsune | 安德森•毛利•友常律師事務所

Bae Kim & Lee | 太平洋律師事務所

Mori Hamada & Matsumoto | 森•濱田松本法律事務所

Kim & Chang | 金•張法律事務所

Nagashima Ohno & Tsunematsu | 長島•大野•常松法律事務所

Lee & Ko | 廣場律師事務所

Nishimura & Asahi | 西村朝日法律事務所

Shin & Kim | 世宗律師事務所

Taiwan Firm of the Year | 年度台灣律師事務所

Up-and-Coming Firm of the Year | 年度最具潛力律所

Chen & Lin | 宏鑒法律事務所

AnJie Law Firm | 安傑律師事務所

Lee and Li | 理律法律事務所

Broad & Bright | 世澤律師事務所

LCS & Partners | 協合國際法律事務所

Han Kun Law Offices | 漢坤律師事務所

Tsar & Tsai | 常在國際法律事務所

Jade & Fountain PRC Lawyers | 九州豐澤律師事務所 Jincheng Tongda & Neal | 金誠同達律師事務所

中國法律商務2013年回顧

117

NOMINATIONS

Annual Awards

Individual Awards | 年度律師 Dispute Resolution | 爭議解決

Labour & Employment | 勞動及人力資源

Ariel Ye – King & Wood Malleons | 金杜律師事務所

Andreas Lauffs – Baker & McKenzie | 貝克•麥堅時國際律師事務所

Chungang Dong – Jingtian & Gongcheng | 競天公誠律師事務所

Isabelle Wan – TransAsia Lawyers | 權亞律師事務所

Eugene Chen – Hogan Lovells | 霍金路偉律師事務所

Jiang Junlu – King & Wood Mallesons | 金杜律師事務所

May Tai – Herbert Smith Freehills | 史密夫律師事務所

Lesli Ligorner – Simmons & Simmons | 西盟斯律師事務所 Ma Jianjun – Jun He | 君合律師事務所

Intellectual Property | 知識產權

Competition | 不正當競爭

Benjamin Bai – Allen & Overy | 安理國際律師事務所

François Renard – Allen & Overy | 安理國際律師事務所

Chen Xuemin – Zhongzi Law Office | 中咨律師事務所

Michael Han – Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer | 富而德律師事務所

David Tian – An, Tian, Zhang & Partners | 安倫律師事務所

Peter Wang – Jones Day | 眾達律師事務所

Geoffrey Lin – Ropes & Gray | 瑞格律師事務所

Susan Ning – King & Wood Mallesons | 金杜律師事務所

Linda Chang – Rouse | 羅思

Wu Peng – Zhong Lun Law Firm | 中倫律師事務所

Real Estate & Construction | 房地產及建築

Rising Star | 律師新秀

Gavin Zhang – Zhong Lun Law Firm | 中倫律師事務所

Jiang Bo – Guantao Law Firm | 觀韜律師事務所

Joel Rothstein – Paul Hastings | 普衡律師事務所

Li Lei – Sidley Austin | 盛德律師事務所

Richard Kim – Allen & Overy | 安理國際律師事務所

Tommy Xia – Llinks Law Offices | 通力律師事務所

Terence Wong – Hogan Lovells | 霍金路偉律師事務所

Victoria Lei – R&P China Lawyers | 方旭律師事務所

Zhu Shuying – Jianwei Law Firm | 建緯律師事務所

Xu Liang – Hogan Lovells | 霍金路偉律師事務所

Firms of the year | 年度杰出律師事務所 China Firm of the Year | 年度中國律師事務所

International Firm of the Year | 年度國際律師事務所

Fangda Partners | 方達律師事務所

Allen & Overy | 安理國際律師事務所

Guantao Law Firm | 觀韜律師事務所

Baker & McKenzie | 貝克•麥堅時國際律師事務所

Jun He | 君合律師事務所

Clifford Chance | 高偉紳律師事務所

King & Wood Mallesons | 金杜律師事務所

Davis Polk & Wardwell | 達維律師事務所

Zhong Lun Law Firm | 中倫律師事務所

Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer | 富而德律師事務所 Herbert Smith Freehills | 史密夫律師事務所

118

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

入圍名單

年度獎項

Outstanding Achievement | 傑出成就獎

Wang Xiaoye | 王曉曄 As one of the leading authorities on the country’s competition law and a scholar dedicated to enhancing competition practices in China, it is China Law & Practice’s honour to award Wang Xiaoye with the Outstanding Achievement Award for 2013. Professor Wang graduated from the Inner Mongolia Normal University and obtained her postgraduate degree from Renmin University. She continued her studies at the University of Hamburg to pursue a Doctor of Law degree, supervised by the former advisor of competition and economic policy at the European Commission, Ernst-Joachim Mestmacher. Upon receiving her doctorate, Professor Wang returned to Beijing where she received an invitation from Zhang Delin of the previous State Economic and Trade Commission to draft the Anti-monopoly Law (中華人民共和國反壟斷法). She was the only representative from academia in the ten person drafting group. In 2003, a new ministry, the Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM), was added in China and competition legislation became one of its most important tasks. Wang was invited many times to lecture the officials at MOFCOM. She also helped the Legislative Affairs Office of the State Council form a ten-expert advisory board, containing jurists and economists, to revise the draft of the law. “Considering China first passed its Anti-monopoly Law in 2007, the country may have lagged behind,” said Professor Wang. “But looking at the last two years, fines worth billions of renminbi were given by the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) and two other organisations against price manipulators in liquor, diary and computer monitor industries. We can say that the enforcement is effective and influential,” she added. But Professor Wang still has concerns: 1. How to deal with the administrative monopoly, and which law can effectively tackle this. 2. How to further apply the antitrust laws to traditionally monopolised industries, like telecommunications, postal services, railways, oil, banking, insurance, securities and other industries. 3. How to enhance law enforcement by the three authorities – NDRC, State Administration for Industry and Commerce and MOFCOM – and create a unified, independent and more authoritative legal enforcement authority. In 2009, Renmin University formally announced the establishment of the Intellectual Property School. As the founding Dean of the IP School, Professor Liu Chuntian continues to educate China’s next generation of intellectual property lawyers and advocates. There is no doubt that for many years to come, Professor Liu’s efforts and expertise will serve to advance the development of China’s intellectual property structure. It is with great honour and pleasure that China Law & Practice recognises Professors Liu’s contribution and commitment to Chinese intellectual property law with the Outstanding Achievement Award. 《中國法律商務》非常高興地將2013年傑出貢獻成就獎授予王曉曄教授，作為中國反壟斷法案立法方面的權威且致力於推動中國市場經濟競爭理念的普及與實施的重要法學引入人。王教授1982年獲內蒙古師範大學哲學學士，1984年獲中國人民大學法學碩士，1988年赴德漢堡大學攻讀法學博士，師從前歐共體委員會競爭政策及經濟政策顧問的Ernst-Joachim Mestmacher。王教授於1993年獲得漢堡法學博士學位，1994年從德國回到北京，應時任國家經濟貿易委員會法規司副司長張德霖之邀，作為學界唯一的代表，加入了近十人規模的反壟斷法起草小組。 2003年後，中國增設商務部，反壟斷法立法隨之成為商務部最重要的工作之一，當時的商務部副部長邀請王教授多次為商務部百名官員宣講該法律的重要性。王教授還幫助推薦了10名由法學家和經濟學家組成的專家顧問團，幫助國務院法制辦組織審議商務部提交的《反壟斷法（送審稿）》。王教授說，自2007年中國正式通過法壟斷立法至今，立法較西方晚，但就近一兩年內的執法力度還是有目共睹的，發改委、商務部等開始對影響民生的產業：如白酒、奶粉，製造業中的液晶屏等行業開出了億元級的罰單，對抗價格壟斷，起到了一定的震懾作用。但同時王教授還提到了目前的一些問題：1. 如何處理行政壟斷問題，應該用哪個法規去制約它。2. 反壟斷法如何進一步適用於傳統的壟斷行業，如電信、郵政、鐵路、石油、銀行、保險、證券等行業。3. 執法權的問題，即是否能改變現在由發改委、工商總局和商務部一同執法的局面，而應孕一個統一、獨立及更權威的執法機關。

中國法律商務2013年回顧

119

Firm Profiles

Alliance J&S Law Firm 19/F, Tower 2, Bright China Chang An Bldg No. 7 Jianguomen Nei Ave Beijing 100005 China Tel: +86 10 6517 8866 Fax: +86 10 6518 0276 Email: zh_fu@alliancelawfirm.com Website: www.alliancelawfirm.com Contact: Fu Zhaohui

Total number of partners: 28 Total number of associates: 65 Year established: 1999 Languages spoken: Chinese, English Key areas of practice: Corporate, securities and capital markets, M&A, banking and finance, real estate and construction, labor and employment, intellectual property and dispute resolution, inbound foreign investment, Chinese companies’ outbound investment, international trade and crossjurisdiction dispute resolution

The firm Alliance J&S Law Firm, formed by the merger of Alliance Law Firm with J&S Law Firm, is a prestigious Beijing-based national law firm, with branch offices in Shanghai and Guangxi Province. It offers clients a full range of legal services in the fields of corporate, securities and capital markets, M&A, banking and finance, real estate and construction, labor and employment, intellectual property and dispute resolution. Our international practice covers all the aforesaid fields when an international element is involved, especially related to inbound foreign investment, Chinese companies’ outbound investment, international trade and cross-jurisdiction dispute resolution. In terms of industry spectrum, we have extensive experience in a number of sectors including the financial services, PE and VC funds investment, telecommunications, energy, green and renewable energy, mining, iron and steel, infrastructure, internet and e-commerce, education, manufacturing, real estate, entertainment, sports, pharmaceuticals, trading, agriculture, high-tech and other emerging business sectors. Our head office is located in the centre of Beijing, in the major business district close to many of China’s top legislative, judicial and government bodies, economic, cultural and academic organisations, as well as many of the world-famous historic sites. We also have two branch offices in Shanghai and Guangxi Province (in southwestern China) which gives us good geographic coverage. All our professionals have received their legal education at excellent universities in China or abroad, and a number of them have work experience in foreign law firms and other business entities. We always work as a cohesive team and genuinely embrace collegiality as part of our distinct culture. In the past decade of practice, we have set up long-term cooperative relationships domestically and internationally with a number of outstanding investment banks, consulting companies, professional equity investors and industrial investors, trust institutions, accounting firms, appraisal firms and other professionals. We have forged fruitful links with excellent foreign lawyers in Europe, North America, Australia, Japan, Hong Kong and Singapore. On the strength of the combination of brilliant professional talents and our favorable geographic location, we are able to provide comprehensive and high-quality services to national and international clients. Our clients include start-ups, state-owned enterprises, privately-owned enterprises, public companies, foreign entities and international conglomerates. We are dedicated to ensuring that our clients’ businesses succeed both in China and around the world.

120

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

律所簡介

北京頤合中鴻律師事務所北京市東城區建國門內大街7號光華長安大廈2座19層郵編 100005

現有合伙人: 28 現有律師: 65 事務所成立時間: 1999

電話: 傳真: 電郵: 網址:

+86 10 6517 8866 +86 10 6518 0276 zh_fu@alliancelawfirm.com www.alliancelawfirm.com

聯繫人: 付朝暉

語言: 中文、英文主要業務領域：公司、證券與資本市場、並購、銀行與金融、房地產與建築工程、勞動用工、知識產權、爭議解決以及外商投資、境外投資、國際貿易等國際業務領域

律所簡介北京頤合中鴻律師事務所（前身為頤合律師事務所和中鴻律師事務所）是一家享有聲譽的綜合性律師事務所。頤合中鴻律師豐富的執業經驗覆蓋了銀行、證券、信託、保險等金融服務領域、投資與基金、電信、傳統能源與新能源、再生能源、礦業、鋼鐵、基礎設施、互聯網和電子商務、教育、加工製造業、房地產、娛樂、體育、醫藥和醫療器械、貿易、農業、高科技和其他新興商業模式等諸多領域。頤合中鴻的專業人員均在國內外接受高等法學教育，一些律師擁有在國外律師事務所或其他商業機構的工作經驗。頤合中鴻是緊密合作的專家團隊，在過往的執業過程中，我們與若干優秀的投資銀行、咨詢公司、私募/創投投資人、產業投資人、信託機構、會計師、評估師等專業機構形成了良好的長期合作關係，並與國外律師行、會計師行等搭建國際網絡，致力於為客戶提供全面、優質高效、高附加值的服務。我們的客戶包括新興企業、國有企業、民營企業、公眾上市公司、外國企業、跨國公司等，頤合中鴻致力於以有價值的專業服務促進我們客戶在中國及全球的商業成功。辦公室：北京、上海、廣西南寧

中國法律商務2013年回顧

121

Firm Profiles

Fangda Partners 32/F, Tower 1 Plaza 66 1266 Nan Jing West Road Shanghai 200040 China

Year established: 1993

Tel: +86 21 2208 1166 Fax: +86 21 5298 5577 Website: www.fangdalaw.com

Key areas of practice: capital markets, M&A, private equity, general corporate and commercial, foreign direct investment, banking, infrastructure development and construction, commercial property, IP protection, bankruptcy and restructuring, dispute resolution, antitrust, compliance and regulatory

Total number of partners: 49 Total number of associates: 165

Languages spoken: Mandarin, (Cantonese, Shanghainese), English, French and German

The firm Established in 1993, Fangda Partners is one of the most well respected law firms in China. With offices in Beijing, Shanghai, Shenzhen and Hong Kong SAR, and a strong team of over 200 lawyers in different locations, we provide legal services to domestic and international clients in all kinds of commercial matters. Fangda is one of the very few PRC firms that can provide one-stop corporate, dispute resolution law services in both mainland China and Hong Kong, and our team is also one of the very few in mainland China that has reached a critical mass while maintaining a high level of service. We are committed to serving our clients in an approach founded on strong local capabilities with global thinking. We are recognised as one of the best advisers in cross-border transactions in China and have been involved in many high profile transactions. Our team-oriented culture ensures that all necessary firm expertise and resources are employed to achieve the best possible results for our clients. We focus on legal work in the areas of capital markets, M&A, private equity, general corporate and commercial, foreign direct investment, banking, infrastructure development and construction, commercial property, IP protection, bankruptcy and restructuring, dispute resolution, antitrust, compliance and regulatory. The excellence and breadth of our experience has made us the firm of choice for our clients.

Languages spoken Mandarin (Cantonese, Shanghainese), English, French and German

Offices Beijing, Shanghai, Shenzhen and Hong Kong SAR

122

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

律所簡介

方達律師事務所中國上海市南京西路1266號恆隆廣場1座32樓郵編 200040

事務所成立時間:1993

電話: +86 21 2208 1166 傳真: +86 21 5298 5577/5599 網址: www.fangdalaw.com

主要業務領域：資本市場、兼並收購、私人股本融資、公司商務、外商直接投資、銀行、項目開發和建築、商業不動產、知識產權、破產重組、爭議解決、反壟斷、合規監管

語言：中文 (粵語、上海話) 、英語、法語和德語

現有合伙人: 49 現有律師:165

律所簡介成立於1993年，方達律師事務所是最受尊敬的中國律師事務所之一。通過在北京、上海、深圳和香港特別行政區的一支超過200名的強大律師團隊，我們為國內和國際客戶提供各種商事法律服務。方達是為數不多的能在中國內地和香港提供一站式的公司和爭議解決法律服務的中國律所，我們也是一個在中國內地為數不多的達到一定規模同時還保持高水平專業標準的團隊。我們致力於憑藉我們極強的本地能力和國際視野服務我們的客戶。我們被認可為是中國跨境交易中最好的顧問之一，並參與了很多富有影響力的重要交易。我們的團隊文化能夠確保我們調動所有必須的全所的專業特長和資源來幫助我們的客戶獲得最好的結果。我們專注於包括資本市場、兼幷收購、私人股本融資、公司商務、外商直接投資、銀行、項目開發和建築、商業不動產、知識產權、破產重組、爭議解決、反壟斷、合規監管等法律工作。我們卓越的業務能力和業務廣度使得我們成為客戶的最佳選擇。

語言中文 (粵語、上海話) 、英語、法語和德語

辦公室北京、上海、深圳和香港特別行政區

中國法律商務2013年回顧

123

Firm Profiles

Hylands Law Firm 5A, East Wing, Hanwei Plaza No.7 Guanghua Road, Chaoyang District Beijing 100004, China Tel: +86 10 5201 9988 Fax: +86 10 6561 2322 Email: jiangjiang@hylandslaw.com Website: www.hylandslaw.com Contact: Jiang Jiang (Partner)

Total number of partners: 43 Total number of associates: 150 Year established: 2007 Languages spoken: Chinese, English, Japanese, French, German, and Italian Key areas of practice: Corporate & securities, banking & financing, transnational investment, intellectual property, media & entertainment, anti-dumping, anti-monopoly, international trade, real estate, labor & employment, litigation & arbitration

Our Firm Hylands Law Firm was founded in 2007 through the consolidation of two prestigious law firms, Hao Tian Law Office and Li Wen & Partners, both of which were founded in the mid 1990s, and became leading firms in their respective practice areas. Headquartered in Beijing, Hylands is capable of advising its clients worldwide with domestic branch offices in Shanghai, Nanjing, Guangzhou and Hong Kong, and cooperates with over 150 law firms in more than 100 countries through TerraLex, a leading network of independent law firms of which Hylands is a member.

Our Professionals There are 43 partners and nearly 200 lawyers and paralegals at Hylands. All of them graduated from prestigious Chinese or foreign law schools, and many can work in English, Japanese, French, German or Italian, in addition to Chinese. They put a special premium on teamwork to provide clients with high quality and efficient legal services. In particular, with their expertise in law and good sense of the commercial practices in various industry sectors and the overall investment environment in China, Hylands’ legal teams are able to provide customised advice tailored to the specific needs of each client.

Our Practice Areas As one of the leading full-service law firms in China, Hylands can provide its clients with a wide range of professional legal advice. In particular, Hylands is highly recognizsd and acclaimed by both clients and legal professionals in the following practice areas: corporate & securities, banking & financing, international investment, intellectual property, media & entertainment, anti-dumping, anti-monopoly, international trade, real estate, labour & employment, litigation & arbitration.

Our Experience Hylands aims at growing together with the clients through its integrity, high efficiency and the most professional and comprehensive legal services. Through years of effort, Hylands has built sound working relations with competent judicial and administrative authorities and agencies, and established an outstanding reputation among securities companies, investment banks, accounting firms and appraisal agencies.

Our Awards Chambers & Partners • Asia-Pacific Leading Firm in International Trade/ Technology, Media & Telecom/ Intellectual Property, 2013 and 2012

China Business Law Journal • Top Shenzhen SME Board IPO legal advisers (March 2012 to April 2013) • Top 10 Shenzhen SME Board IPOs (March 2012 to April 2013) • “Outbound M&A deal of the year”, 2012

Corporate INTL Magazines • Commercial Arbitration/ M&A/ Trade Law Firm of the Year in China, 2013

Asian Legal Business • Top 20 Largest Law Firm in China, 2012 and 2011

China Law & Practice • Intellectual Property Contentious “PRC Firm of the Year”, 2012

124

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

律所簡介

浩天信和律師事務所中國北京市朝陽區光華路7號漢威大廈東區5A 郵編：100004

現有合伙人: 43人現有律師: 150人事務所成立時間: 2007年

電話: 傳真: 電郵: 網址:

+86 10 5201 9988 +86 10 6561 2322 jiangjiang@hylandslaw.com www.hylandslaw.com

聯繫人: 姜江（合伙人）

語言: 漢語、英語、日語、法語、德語和意大利語主要業務領域: 公司證券、銀行金融、跨國投資、知識產權、娛樂傳媒、反傾銷、反壟斷、國際貿易、房地產、勞動關係、訴訟仲裁

律所簡介浩天信和律師事務所由北京市浩天律師事務所和北京李文律師事務所，於2007年新設合併組建而成。兩家前身事務所均創立於上世紀90年代，並在各自執業領域成績斐然。浩天信和總部位於北京，同時在上海、南京、廣州及香港設有分所，並通過加入TerraLex聯盟在全球100多個國家和地區擁有150 多家合作律師事務所，能夠為遍布全球的客戶提供全方位的專業服務。

專業團隊浩天信和現有43名合伙人和近200名執業律師及律師助理，全部畢業於國內外著名大學的法學院，並能用漢語、英語、日語、法語、德語或意大利語進行工作。他們特別重視團隊合作精神，努力以全所共同的力量為每一位客戶提供優質、高效的法律服務。這支專業團隊中的律師，不僅是各個領域的法律專家，而且熟悉中國的投資環境和各個行業的不同商業慣例，具有豐富的實務經驗，能夠針對客戶的具體需要，為其提供量身定做的法律解決方案。

執業領域浩天信和作為中國居領先地位的綜合性律師事務所之一，力求滿足客戶全方位多層次的法律服務需求，尤其在公司證券、銀行金融、跨國投資、知識產權、娛樂傳媒、反傾銷、反壟斷、國際貿易、房地產、勞動關係、訴訟仲裁等領域，獲得業內外廣泛認可和高度贊譽。

從業經驗浩天信和旨在通過誠信、高效，以及最專業、最全面的法律服務，與客戶共同成長。經過多年的努力，在司法部門及行政機關樹立了良好的工作形象，並在與證券公司、投資銀行、會計師事務所、評估機構的合作中，獲得了卓越的口碑與信譽。

榮譽奖項錢伯斯 • 2013年和2012年亞太區國際貿易、傳媒通訊、知識產權領域“優秀律師事務所” 《商法》雜誌 • 深交所中小板IPO項目“優秀律師事務所”（2012年3月至2013年4月） • 深交所中小板10大IPO項目（2012年3月至2013年4月） • 2012年海外投資並購領域“年度傑出交易” 英國Corporate INTL雜誌 • 2013年商事仲裁、企業並購、貿易領域“年度中國律所” 亞洲法律雜誌 • 2012年和2011年中國規模最大的律師事務所前20強中國法律商務 • 2012年知識產權領域（國內訴訟）“年度律師事務所”

中國法律商務2013年回顧

125

Firm Profiles

P C Woo & Co 12th Floor Princeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Building 10 Chater Road Central, Hong Kong

Total number of partners: 16 Total number of associates: 35+ Year established: 1945

Tel: +852 2533 7700 Fax: +852 2810 1179 Email: pcw@pcwoo.com.hk Website: www.pcwoo.com Contact: Dr Moses Cheng Mo-Chi, senior partner

Languages spoken: English, Putonghua, Cantonese, Fukien, Shanghainese Key areas of practice: Commercial & Corporate; Mergers & Acquisitions; Litigation and Dispute Resolution; Property; Probate & Trust; China Investment & Attestation; Intellectual Property; NGO & Charity Practice

The firm Founded by Dr The Honourable P C Woo in 1945, shortly after the end of the Second World War, P C Woo & Co is one of the longest-standing law firms in Hong Kong. It has more than 100 staff, including over 35 lawyers, and offers a full range of legal services. The firm has pioneered the establishment of an alliance of law firms in major cities in China, and strives to offer local as well as overseas clients convenient access to regional legal expertise. In 2011, P C Woo & Co joined hands with Zhonglun W&D Law Firm to form an association that has been approved by the Ministry of Justice in Beijing under the Closer Economic Partnership Arrangement, popularly known as CEPA. As part of this association, P C Woo & Co will be positioned to service the needs of clients in Beijing, Shanghai, London, Riyadh, Guangzhou, Shenzhen, Shijiazhuang, Chengdu, Nanjing, Tianjin, Wuhan, Taiyuan, Jinan and Hong Kong. Together with its associates, it can advise on the laws of China, England and Wales, Saudi Arabia and, of course, Hong Kong. Lawyers in PC Woo & Co are actively involved in legal affairs and legal education in Hong Kong. Three partners have served as president of the Law Society of Hong Kong.

Areas of Practice Corporate / M&A: corporate finance, company and commercial, mergers and acquisitions, corporate restructurings, regulatory compliance. Litigation / dispute resolution: general commercial litigation, professional indemnity insurance, employeesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; compensation, matrimonial proceedings, regulatory and disciplinary enquiries, investigations and proceedings, criminal and quasi-criminal matters, judicial review. Property: property development, joint ventures and financing, town planning matters, property redevelopment projects, acquisitions and disposals, bank mortgages, commercial and residential leases and tenancies. Probate, trusts and private clients: tax planning and establishment of trusts for individuals and families, contentious and non-contentious probate and estate administration matters. China practice: direct investments and joint ventures, property development projects, China attestation. Intellectual property: registration and protection of trademarks, patent and designs, intellectual property disputes. Public policy, NGOs and education practice: establishment of incorporated management committees for schools in Hong Kong, advising school sponsoring bodies and others on matters relating to the Education Ordinances. Corporate governance: advice to board, compliance, audit committee oversight, indemnification considerations, D&O insurance.

Offices Hong Kong, Beijing, Shanghai, London, Riyadh, Guangzhou, Shenzhen, Shijiazhuang, Chengdu, Nanjing, Tianjin, Wuhan, Taiyuan, Jinan.

126

China Law & Practice Annual Review 2013

律所簡介

胡百全律師事務所香港中環遮打道10號太子大廈12樓電話: 傳真: 電郵: 網址:

+852 2533 7700 +852 2810 1179 pcw@pcwoo.com.hk www.pcwoo.com

事務所成立時間: 1945 語言: 英語, 普通話, 廣東話, 福建話, 上海話主要業務領域：商業及公司、合併與收購、訴訟及仲裁、房地產、遺產及信託管理、中國投資及公證業務、知識產權、非政府機構及慈善團體法律事務。

聯繫人: 鄭慕智律師, 首席合伙人現有合伙人: 16 現有律師: 35+

關於公司本律師事務所由胡百全博士於1945年成立,是香港其中一間歷史悠久的律師事務所,擁有超過一百名員工,其中有超過35位律師及提供多元化的法律服務。此外, 律師事務所還在中國大城市成立了百全律師聯盟, 希望為本地以及海外客戶提供便利的本地法律專業服務。於2011，胡百全律師事務所正式與北京中倫文德律師事務所在《更緊密的經濟貿易關係安排》下,獲得中國北京市司法部批准兩所聯營。我們將共同為客戶提供多個司法管轄區一站式的專業法律服務。作為聯營方, 香港胡百全律師事務所可為北京、上海、石家莊、成都、南京、天津、武漢、太原、濟南、深圳、倫敦、利雅德、廣州及香港的客戶提供國際性的專業法律服務。透過我們的聯營夥伴，我們可提供專業法律意見的司法管轄區涵蓋中國、英格蘭和威爾士、沙地阿拉伯及香港。客戶只需聯繫香港辦事處便可獲得上述各司法管轄區的專業法律服務。本律師事務所的律師積極參與本地的法律事務和教育, 當中有三位合夥人更曾經擔任過香港律師會會長。

所提供的法律服務 • 商業及公司服務: 包括證券及企業融資,收購合併,重組及上市公司合規事宜 • 訴訟及調解事務: 普遍商業訴訟,專業保險索償,僱員賠償,婚姻訴訟,紀律訴訟及調查,刑事及准刑事案件,司法覆核等 • 房地產事務: 物業發展,物業重建計劃,合併及轉讓,銀行按揭,有關商業,工業及住宅租約的事項 • 遺產承辦及信託管理事務: 稅務管理,個人及家人信託,爭議性及非爭議性的遺囑服務 • 中國業務事務: 直接投資及合資經營,物業發展計劃,中國公證服務 • 知識產權服務: 商標註冊及保護,專利及外觀設計,知識產權爭議 • 義務工作: 成立香港學校的註冊管理委員會,建議贊助學校團體有關教育條例的事宜 • 企業管理: 對董事會,合規審查,監督審計委員會, 彌償損失,董監事及高級管理人員責任保險

中國法律商務2013年回顧

127

IT’S HARD TO GET PROFESSIONAL RESULTS WITH AMATEUR TOOLS.

PROFESSIONALS SEARCH STN.

Your tool shouldn’t restrict your results. STN is the most complete search and retrieval platform for the world’s disclosed scientiﬁc and technical research. Only STN offers CASSM REGISTRY and other authoritative databases, Thomson Reuters’ Derwent World Patents Index®, and the most complete offering of science and technical content along with unparalleled search precision. The world’s patent ofﬁces rely on STN, shouldn’t you? Learn more at stn-international.de. STN is operated jointly by CAS and FIZ Karlsruhe worldwide and is represented in Japan by JAICI.