德辅成员资深大律师

沙惜时  资深大律师

伦敦国王学院法学士(荣誉学位)
沙惜时 资深大律师

个人简历

个人简历

在加入大律师行业之前,沙惜时资深大律师曾是一名事务律师。他于1982年成为英国大律师,并于1983年获得了香港大律师的执业资格。1989年至1999年间,沙惜时大律师于英国伦敦的 2 Essex Court 大律师事务所执业,该事务所现更名为Quadrant Chambers大律师事务所。同时,他亦在香港代表客户出席聆讯。

沙惜时资深大律师在商业与企业事务的领域有广泛的执业经验。就如2011年版的《钱伯斯亚太地区指南》所言,沙惜时大律师的执业范围包括“保险与金融相关的复杂争议解决”,以及船舶、银行、证券、公司法诉讼与仲裁等领域。

重要案件

  • David Subotic & ors v Securities and Futures Commission (2023) 26 HKCFAR 488. Service out of the jurisdiction of proceedings under s.213 of the Securities and Futures Ordinance.
  • The “Star Centurion” (2023) 26 HKCFAR 297. Ship collision.  Claim for wreck removal not subject to limitation of liability.
  • PT Asuransi Tugu Pratama Indonesia TBK v Citibank NA (2023) 26 HKCFAR 1. Claim for breach of bank’s Quincecare   Wrongful debits claimable as debt not damages.
  • Haller AG v Vestey International Group Ltd [2023] 1 HKLRD 39. Civil procedure – service out of jurisdiction – necessary or proper party.  Arbitration – appeal from refusal to stay – Court of Appeal had no jurisdiction to grant leave to appeal.
  • The “Milano Bridge” [2022] 1 HKLRD 1151. Application to stay for forum non conveniens – substantial justice could be done in alternative jurisdiction which had not updated tonnage limits eroded by inflation.
  • Standard Chartered Bank (Hong Kong) Ltd v Lau & anor [2021] 2 HKLRD 425 (CA). Civil evidence – refusal of defendant’s application to give evidence at trial via video conferencing – application for leave to appeal refused.
  • Eminent Investments (Asia Pacific) Ltd v DIO Corportion (2020) 23 HKCFAR 487. Financial advisory agreement – construction – claim for transaction fee in respect of fundraising entered into after termination of agreement.
  • Bright Shipping Ltd v Changhong Group (HK) Ltd [2019] 5 HKLRD 30. Application to stay ship collision action on ground of forum non conveniens.  Collision in international waters, but in PRC Exclusive Economic Zone – stay to PRC dismissed.
  • Dymocks Franchise Systems (China) Ltd v Norton Rose Fulbright Hong Kong [2019] 3 HKLRD 742 Professional negligence – failure to advise franchise transferee of potential application of Transfer of Businesses (Protection of Creditors) Ordinance (Cap.49)  – within scope of retainer.
  • Chu Kong v Lau Wing Yan & ors [2019] 1 HKLRD 589. Arbitration – stay of proceedings – multiple derivative action – whether arbitration agreement incapable of being performed.
  • Elliot International LP v. Bank of East Asia Ltd. [2018] 5 HKLRD 319; [2018] 4 HKLRD 427; [2018] 4 HKLRD 396. Unfair prejudice petition – share placement – share dilution.
  • T v A [2018] 3 HKLRD 730. Arbitration – authority to commence arbitration – whether subrogated insurer had authority to arbitrate using assured’s name.
  • The “TS Singapore” and “Xin Nan Tai 77” [2018] 4 HKLRD 1 (CA). Ship collision – duty of give-way vessel to take early and substantial action to keep well clear – approach to apportionment on appeal.
  • Brave Venture Ltd. v Xinhua New Media Holdings & anor [2017] 5 HKLRD 153. Company law – injunctions under ss.728-730 of the Companies Ordinance (Cap.622) – whether Cayman company is breach of articles of association.
  • Ho Wai Ping v Ho Ka Man Carmen [2017] 2 HKLRD 158 (CA). Probate – whether informal will conditional – whether testator had testamentary intent for will to have immediate dispositive effect upon execution.
  • Allen & Overy & anor v Beijing Tong Gang Da Sheng Trade Co Ltd (2016) 19 HKCFAR 705.
  • Newocean Petroleum Co Ltd v OW Bunker China Ltd [2016] 3 HKLRD 892
  • Sea Powerful II Special Maritime Enterprises (ENE) v Bank of China Ltd [2016] 3 HKLRD 352 (CA).
  • Brink’s Hong Kong Ltd v KBC Bank NV (2016) 19 HKCFAR 272. Carriage by air – plaintiff bank entitled to bring claim as pledgee for conversion by misdelivery
  • SFC v Young Bik Fung [2016] 1 HKLRD 1249.
  • Leung Wing Yi Asther v Kwok Yu Wah (2015) HKCFAR 605.
  • The “Almojil 61” [2015] 3 HKLRD 598 (CA).
  • LWYA v KYW [2015] 2 HKLRD 1029 (CA).
  • The “Ruby Star” [2015] 1 HKLRD 543 (CA).
  • Luck Continent Ltd v Cheng Chee Tock Theodore (2014) 17 HKCFAR 863
  • Excel Courage Holdings Ltd v Wong Sin Lai [2014] 3 HKLRD 642 (CA).
  • Falcon Private Bank Ltd v Borry Bernard Edouard Charles Ltd (2014) 17 HKCFAR 281.
  • Pony HK World Ltd v Vand Petrochemicals (BVI) Co Ltd (2013) 16 HKCFAR 937.
  • Re The Grande Holdings Ltd [2013] 4 HKLRD 353.
  • SFC v Tiger Asia Management LLC (2013) 16 HKCFAR 324.
  • The “Decurion” [2013] 2 HKLRD 930 (CA).
  • PCCW-HKT Telephone Ltd v Aitken (2009) 12 HKCFAR 114. Employment – restraint of trade – confidential and privileged information acquired by solicitor employee during employment – whether ex-employer could restrain former employee from being employed where such information might be relevant.
  • Ming An Insurance Co (HK) Ltd v Ritz-Carlton Ltd (No 2) (2009) 12 HKCFAR 158. Judgment and pre-judgment interest – employer found vicariously liable on appeal – ss.48 and 49 of Cap.4.
  • The “Hua Tian Long” [2008] 4 HKLRD 745 (CA). Admiralty arrest – security for plaintiff’s reasonably arguable best case – amount of security increased on appeal.
  • Kelso Enterprises v Liu Yiu Keung [2007] 3 HKLRD 266 (CA). Company law – whether dissolution should be deferred – s.249(4) Cap.32
  • Total Energy Asia Ltd v Standard Chartered Bank (Hong Kong) Ltd [2007] 1 HKLRD 871. Letter of credit – UCP art.14(d) – whether notice of rejection valid.
  • PCCW Global Ltd v Interactive Communications Service Ltd [2007] 1 HKLRD 309 (CA). Arbitration agreement – whether prima facie case that billing dispute was within the scope of arbitration agreement.
  • The “Convenience Container” [2006] 3 HKLRD 610; [2007] 3 HKLRD 575 (CA). Admiralty jurisdiction – writ issued after judicial sale of vessel – meaning of “beneficial owner” in s.12B(4)(b)(i) of Cap.4 – whether winding up order divested company of beneficial ownership.
  • Far East Drug (BVI) Co Ltd v First Pacific Co Ltd (2006) 9 HKCFAR 224. Contract – construction – clause required claim to be brought “before the date which falls 18 months after the date of this agreement” – corresponding date rule.
  • Ericcson Ltd v KLM Royal Dutch Airlines [2006] 1 HKLRD 584. Carriage by air – liability of carrier – Amended Warsaw Convention art.18 – Guadalajara Convention.
  • Jae Hoon Oh v Richdale [2005] 2 HKLRD 285 (CA); [2006] HKEC 743 (CA); (2006) 9 HKCFAR 649 (CFA). Tort of malicious prosecution – application to strike out.
  • BC Enterprise Sdn Bhd v Bank of China Group Insurance Co Ltd [2004] 1 HKLRD 20. Marine insurance – construction – inception of insurance on shipment – warranty that carrying vessel be ISM Code compliant.
  • Secretary for Justice v Hon Kam Wing [2003] 1 HKLRD 524. Constructive trust – whether within class of trust to which limitation did not apply – whether constructive trust was real trust of only a basis for equitable relief.
  • Guang Xin Enterprises Ltd. v Kwan Wong Tan & Fong [2002] 2 HKLRD 319; [2003] 3 HKLRD 527 (CA). Professional negligence – auditors – whether liable for trading losses.
  • Trafigura v China Navigation Co. [2001] 1 HKLRD 17. Bill of lading – misdelivery – conversion – whether pledgor of cargo had locus to sue.
  • The “Sparti” [2000] HKLRD561. Transferability of maritime lien – seafarers’ wages.
  • The “Resource 1” (2000) 3 HKCFAR 187. Admiralty action in rem – meaning of “owner” in s.12B(4)(b) of Cap.4 – challenge to jurisdiction.

具体专业领域

以律师身份参与仲裁,仲裁裁决的执行,银行责任,信贷融资,金融产品不当销售,放债人诉讼,证券法,证监会执法行动,合同,法律冲突,衡平法,侵权,货物销售,保险法,可转让票据,合伙,公司治理,上市及其他监管规则合规事务,衍生诉讼,不公平损害呈请,离婚,婚姻财务,破产,重组,清盘,航空,信用证,货物销售及,航运,核数师的疏忽,纪律处分程序,医疗疏忽,律师的疏忽行为,测量师的疏忽行为,容许查察济助,资产追回,银行账簿令,文件披露,强制令,第三方披露令

荣誉及奖项

业界认可给予沙惜时  资深大律师

沙惜时资深大律师荣登2023年度《钱伯斯大中华区指南》香港大律师榜单,在商事争议解决领域获评第一级别。

德辅大律师事务所的沙惜时资深大律师在商事诉讼领域拥有丰富实务经验,包括航运、证券以及金融服务等相关争议。受访者评价沙惜时资深大律师“是一位在该领域全能的资深大律师,处理过几乎所有类型的案件。他在业界德高望重,亦受到司法机构的尊重,能够自如地指导案件,在法庭上十分雄辩。”另一位受访者评价沙惜时资深大律师“是一位优秀且足智多谋的讼辩人”。

— 《钱伯斯大中华区指南》(2023年)

沙惜时资深大律师荣登2023年度《法律500强》亚太地区榜单,获评为商事争议解决航空及航运领域之领先资深大律师。

— 《法律500强》亚太地区:香港大律师(2023年)

沙惜时资深大律师荣登2022年度《钱伯斯大中华区指南》商事争议解决领域榜单,位列第一等(Band 1):

“沙惜时资深大律师被称赞为「非常出色」,「是一位优秀的讼辩人和交叉盘问者」。 他在商事诉讼领域的执业范围十分广泛,涵盖航运、证券和金融服务相关争议。”

— 《钱伯斯大中华区指南》(2022年)

沙惜时资深大律师荣登2022年度《法律500强》亚太地区榜单,获评为商事争议解决航空及航运领域之领先资深大律师。

受访者称赞沙惜时资深大律师为“一位优秀的讼辩人和交叉盘问者”, “一位在香港航运领域成就卓越的资深大律师”。

— 《法律500强》亚太地区:香港大律师(2022年)

很少有受访者谈到德辅大律师事务所的沙惜时资深大律师时不赞同他是“天生的辩护人并且才华横溢”的观点,评论者不同程度地强调了他“极其流畅的风格”和“辨别坏点子”的能力,同时他还能够提出“人们都想不到的新颖观点”。 他具有令人称颂的商事诉讼技巧,尤其擅长与金融服务相关的案件。

— 《钱伯斯亚太地区指南》(2020年)

德辅大律师事务所的沙惜时资深大律师在今年继续被不止一位评论者同时认为是「香港最好的大律师之一」以及香港执业领域最广泛的大 律师之一。此外,评论者们亦认同他优秀的展示技巧,一位评论者提到「他能够用相当简明的方法解释新颖的概念,并具有说服力,直达 重点」。他的执业重点包括金融服务、证券以及航运法案件,并且在最近一宗知名度很高的高等法院案件中代表 Elliott Management 对冲基金起诉东亚银行。

— 《钱伯斯亚太地区指南》(2019年)

沙惜时资深大律师「被事务律师认为是香港最全面的资深大律师之一」,并且评论者评价他「不畏接受挑战且意志坚定的诉讼律师」,能够「在最困难的案件中找到转机。」此外,他也因其对不同法律领域的深入了解而令人敬佩。

— 《钱伯斯亚太地区指南》(2018年)

沙惜时资深大律师被评价为「在所有方面都十分优秀」,其中他「出色的商业头脑」以及「令人敬畏的诉讼技巧」尤其令人称道。他在金融服务、证券及船舶法的表现特别突出。

— 《钱伯斯亚太地区指南》(2017年)

法律从业者都认为德辅大律师事务所的沙惜时资深大律师是一位积极且准备充足的大律师,有人评价他为「我所见过的反应最为迅速的人之一」。他的执业重点包括船舶、保险与财务争议等领域。沙惜时资深大律师因其在一系列商务纠纷中的参与令人瞩目,包括银行、船舶以及证券法事宜。他被评价为是「十分优秀的大律师」:他经验丰富、不畏挑战,并且能充分投入到每一个案件中。

— 《钱伯斯亚太地区指南》(2016年)

一位应被始终重视的大律师。

— 《钱伯斯亚太地区指南》(2012年)

因其优秀而有效的法庭讼辩而闻名。

— 《钱伯斯亚太地区指南》(2011年)

沙惜时资深大律师在航运法领域十分有名。他亦成功参与一系列商事法案件,包括银行法及股东争议。评论者们认为「他的讼辩技巧使他脱颖而出,成为市场上优秀的大律师之一」。

— 《钱伯斯国际指南》(2011年)

一位第一等的大律师,讼辩技巧十分优秀。

— 《钱伯斯亚太地区指南》(2010年)

成功的战士,在法庭内表现出众。

— 成功的战士,在法庭内表现出众。