作者：Edmund Wan Nicole Parlee 金杜律师事务所香港办公室
试
想如下情形：双方当事人因协议产生争议，该协议包含仲裁条款。另外，双方在一方当事人公司注册地进行了仲裁，在仲裁中另一方当事人对该公司提出了清算申请。仲裁庭对该面临破产的公司做出了仲裁裁决。该公司在香港拥有资产，而债权人现在想要行使其权利。由于香港法院对仲裁裁决大方执行，其做出的清算判决可能会给外国清算人和这家外国公司的其他债权人带来很大损失。
本文将讨论如下问题，即债权人有权依据仲裁裁决行使其对濒临清算的外国公司在港资产享有的权利，而该行为有可能会损害其他债权人的利益。
全文阅读，请点击此处。
By Yin Juquan and Song Miao King & Wood Mallesons’ Commercial & Regulatory Group
L
abor disputes tend to occur among the contractor, the affiliated party, the lessor and lessor of business license in cases involving illegal contracting or subcontracting to employers without entity qualifications. To be specific, it’s worth pondering over who takes responsibility once occupational injury occurs if in the process of construction, the construction unit subcontracts partial duties to employers without entity qualifications. The above matter involves sorting legal relations and attribution of liability. Court decisions vary from case to case. On 1st December 2015, the Shenzhen Intermediate Court issued “Judgment Guideline of Shenzhen Intermediate Court on Trial of Labor Dispute Case” (hereinafter as “Judgment Guideline”), with “Explanation on the ‘Judgment Guideline on Trial of Labor Dispute Case’” (hereinafter as “Explanation”) attached as elaborations and also provisions regarding the aforementioned matter.
Read full article, please click here.
By Linda Liang and Zhang Jingjing King & Wood Mallesons’ Commercial & Regulatory Group
A
n increasing number of employers are resorting to part-time employment in practice. Compared to full-time employment, the former bears more flexibility for both the employer and employee. For the employer, part-time employment features low cost and more freedom in contract termination; for the employee, it means shorter hours and multiple jobs.
Read full article, please click here.
By Paul Stothard King & Wood Mallesons’ London Office
I
ran has been subject to a web of UN, US, and EU sanctions since the 1970s, but a significant part of those sanctions are now poised to be relaxed following a historical deal reached between Iran, the EU and the “P5+1” (the United Kingdom, France, Germany, the US, China, and Russia) in July this year. Foreign investment by investors from these and associated jurisdictions may be politically sensitive, particularly if they involve key Iranian industries. The need for protections for foreign investors against illegitimate interference from the Iranian state / state owned entities may be of paramount importance.
Read full article, please click here.
作者：Paul Stothard Alexis Namdar 金杜律师事务所伦敦办公室
自20世纪70年代以来，伊朗一直受到联合国、美国和欧盟的联合制裁，但是继今年7月伊朗与欧盟和“P5+1”（英国、法国、德国、美国、中国和俄罗斯）达成历史性的协议之后，如今正准备放松其中大部分制裁。来自这些国家及相关司法辖区的投资者的外国投资可能具有一定的政治敏感性，投资涉及伊朗核心产业时尤为如此。保护外国投资者不受伊朗国家／国有企业的非法干预可能极其重要。
本文旨在为放松对伊制裁后的潜在投资者提供一个详细指南，重点部分请点击此处。
作者：何放 金杜律师事务所争议解决部
知
识产权权利边界的具有不同于一般物权的模糊性，容易使得部分知识产权权利人产生投机心理，使得知识产权有被部分权利人滥用的可能。笔者系2003年中国首例请求确认不侵犯商标权（中国社会科学出版社诉被告英国费德里克.沃恩公司请求确认“彼得兔Peter Rabbit”不侵权）的代理律师，自首例的“彼得兔”案发生以来的十多年里，确认不侵权之诉实践不仅在司实践中获得长足的进展，而且在最高法院司法解释以及民事案件案由规定里都有所确立其“操作 标准”。然而， 一般的请求确认不侵权之诉在诉讼程序上由被警告的侵权人先行提起， 而本文作者评述这起典型案例，是被控侵权人施华洛世奇（上海）贸易有限公司(作者系该公司代理律师) 巧妙地在原告起诉侵权之后，充分利用了法院要求的诉前调解程序，易守为攻，成功使另一案件当事人美泰资本公司在其作为原告最先起诉的知识产权诉讼中根本丧失了其程序优势并导致其最终放弃了实体权利之诉讼请求。
全文阅读，请点击此处。
