On 22 March 2013, a company and its director were acquitted by the Hong Kong’s Magistrate’s Court of four counts of issuing advertisements to promote a collective investment scheme, including posting relevant information on the company’s website, without the authorisation of the Securities and Futures Commission (SFC) in contravention of section 103 of the Securities and Futures Ordinance.
Read More Internet marketing of collective investment schemes to professional investors

On 9 April 2013, the Office of Privacy Commissioner for Personal Data (“Commissioner“) issued a report in respect of the investigation carried out by the Commissioner against a body check service company and an insurance broker concerning the unfair collection of personal data from the public by the body check service company and its transfer to the insurance broker for use in direct marketing.
Read More Hong Kong: The Office of Privacy Commissioner for Personal Data Finds an Insurance Broker Collected Personal Data for Use in Direct Marketing by Arguably Deceitful Means

The Competition Commission (CC) has published an annotated issues statement in its investigation into private motor insurance. This follows the reference of the market by the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) to the CC in October 2012 (please see our previous blog here).
Read More UK: Competition Commission publishes annotated issues statement in private motor insurance investigation

In United Marine Aggregates v GM Welding & Engineering Ltd and Novae Syndicates, the Court of Appeal overturned a costs award of a first instance judge which had unfairly penalised the Part 20 Defendant insurer in costs, despite it ultimately not being liable.
Read More UK: Court of Appeal: Approach to costs where Part 20 Defendant insurer found not liable

In Versloot Dredging v HDI [2013] EWHC 1666, Popplewell J has criticised the Privy Council decision in Stemson v AMP [2006] UKPC 30 and the Court of Appeal decision in Agapitos v Agnew [2003] QB 556 concerning the circumstances in which the Court should reject a policyholder’s claim that is supported by a fraudulent device.
Read More UK: Approach to Fraudulent Devices Criticised