In the Press

Corporate Treasurer publishes Patrick Chan's comments on the No Consent Regime

Corporate Treasurer published Patrick Chan's comments regarding the No Consent Regime, following a recent Hong Kong decision court decision that could have far-reaching implications for financial institutions that are the victims of cyber fraud.


Litigation & Disputes Partner, Patrick Chan in the Hong Kong office, said that treasures and other corporate final professionals will need to act fast to halt the proceeds of fraud, should they encounter one. 


"On and off, I deal with no less than 20 of these types of cases a year, and for some victims, the amounts involved are less than 100,000 Euro or $100,000 and it is quite costly to take out the Mareva (freezing) injunction." 


"It costs between $10-20,000 for an application of this type, so if you've lost $100,000, you have to decide if it is worth it. There's an old saying, 'do you want to throw good money after bad?"


Chan said that for the smaller victims of cybercrime, the regime has been become more difficult since the case of Tam Sze Leung & Ors vs Commissioner of Police.


"Ultimately, these smaller victims can no longer rely on the administrative power of the police," he comments. 


He concludes: "If they really want to go after their money, they will have to invest further costs for their legal teams to obtain a Mareva injunction, in the hope that some of the money is still there. If there isn't, then they'll have lost even more."  


The story was first published in Corporate Treasurer, in a story titled: Letter of no consent: why the proceeds of fraud have become tougher to recoup is behind a paywall and available in full with a subscription. 

Our thinking

Share this Page