Search for:
Author

Joy Lam

Browsing
Joy Lam is a registered foreign lawyer in Baker McKenzie’s Hong Kong office and a member of the Firm's Financial Services Group. Joy's practice focuses on advising clients within the virtual assets ecosystem in relation to virtual asset funds, tokenized funds, non-fund tokenized offerings, and the complex and rapidly evolving regulatory requirements for providing infrastructure that services the virtual assets ecosystem. Joy’s representative experience includes advising on Asia’s first open ended tokenized fund, Asia’s first closed ended tokenized fund and securing the first approval from Hong Kong’s Securities and Futures Commission for a 100% virtual assets fund that permits subscriptions and redemptions to be effected in the form of virtual assets. She also advises on a wide range of traditional fund formation transactions, including real estate funds, private equity funds and hedge funds and advises on fund related corporate matters including upstream management and seeding arrangements.

The speed and volume of change in the crypto asset markets has accelerated across the globe, with established financial institutions increasingly entering the sector whilst regulators look to keep pace. Recent high-profile developments and market volatility have led to growing calls for scrutiny and regulatory controls. Navigating this fast paced environment, within a sometimes disjointed regulatory framework, can be challenging.
This virtual seminar series will provide insights on how the regulatory landscape is changing and discuss the future of crypto within the financial services sector. Set out below are details of our 2022 series.

In one of the first cases in Hong Kong in which the court has granted freezing injunctions over bitcoins, the Court of First Instance has now handed down judgment in the trial of Nico Constantijn v Stive Jean-Paul Dan [2022] HKCFI 1254. The court held that the defendant acted as the plaintiff’s sales agent in respect of the plaintiff’s bitcoins. The court found the defendant had breached his fiduciary duties in failing to account to the plaintiff for the bitcoins and the relevant sales proceeds. Consequently, the court held that the defendant held on trust for the plaintiff the unsold bitcoins, the proceeds from the sale of the bitcoins and the fruits thereof.