Listing Rules and Guidance: Contents
The HKEX Rules, Interpretation and Guidance are maintained by Thomson Reuters Governance, Risk and Compliance to organise the materials for greater accessibility. Hyperlinked cross references are now available in the HTML versions.
In the case of discrepancies between HTML and PDF versions of the HKEX Rules, Interpretation and Guidance, the PDF version prevails.
View whole section
This section contains extracts of Listing Division's letters to issuers, interpreting the Listing Rules on specific listing matters.
Rejection Letter (RL) – This series comprises a selection of letters explaining the Division's rejection of specific listing applications.
No Further Disciplinary Action (Guidance) Letter (LEGL) - This series comprises a selection of letters issued following investigation of suspected breaches of the Rules and where the Division decided not to pursue disciplinary action. The letters communicate the Division's interpretation or expectations as to the conduct of an issuer and its directors and are now published for general guidance and to promote transparency about the disposal of potential disciplinary matters.
Please visit Archive to view marked-up versions and versions that have been superseded or withdrawn.
|Date (mm/yyyy)||Reference Number||Particulars||Listing Rules||Document Type||Content Category|
|07/2007||RL23-07||Letter 1 - The Listing Division rejected the listing application of the Company for the reason that the Company was unable to comply with the minimum profit requirement under Listing Rule 8.05(1)(a) and the suitability requirement under Listing Rule 8.04. Letter 2 - The Listing Committee upheld the rejection decision of the Listing Division. Letter 3 - The Listing (Review) Committee reversed the decision of the Listing Committee, subject to certain specified conditions.||Rule 8.05(1) (a)||Rejection Letter||New Applicants|
|07/2007||RL22-07||Letter 1 - The Listing Division rejected the listing application of the Company for the reason that the Company has not complied with the Listing Committee's requirement of increasing the shareholders' approval threshold for delisting and privatisation through scheme of arrangement or capitalisation to above the current minimum requirements. Letter 2 - The Listing Committee decided to overturn the decision of the Listing Division, subject to certain specified conditions.||Rule 2.04||Rejection Letter||New Applicants|
|02/2007||RL21-07||The Listing Committee rejected the listing application of the Company for the reason that the Group was not able to demonstrate that it is capable of carrying on its business independently of its controlling shareholders and therefore the Listing Committee considered the Group not suitable for listing as required by Listing Rule 8.04.||Rule 8.04||Rejection Letter||New Applicants|
|02/2007||RL20-07||Letter 1 - The Listing Committee considered the Company not suitable for listing under Listing Rule 8.04 because the Company's business model was effectively captive to another company which was both the source of its principal raw materials and its principal customer channel during the Track Record Period. The Listing Committee considered this to be an extreme case that could not be adequately addressed by corporate governance measures alone given the conflicting roles of the Company's controlling shareholder. Letter 2 - The Listing (Review) Committee decided to uphold the decision of the Listing Committee.||Rule 8.04||Rejection Letter||New Applicants|
|02/2007||RL19-07||The Listing Committee rejected the listing application of the Company for the reason that the Group should not be considered suitable for listing under Listing Rule 8.04 in light of that the change in the nature of the Company's revenue generating activities going forward was so fundamental as to affect its suitability for listing and was not a matter which could be dealt with solely by disclosure.||Rule 8.04||Rejection Letter||New Applicants|
|02/2007||RL18-07||Letter 1 - The GEM Listing Committee rejected the listing application of the Company for the reason that the Group should not be considered suitable for listing under GEM Listing Rule 11.06 in light of the various issues arising from an anonymous complaint relating to the Company's borrowings from its employees. Letter 2 -The GEM Listing (Review) Committee decided to overturn the decision of the GEM Listing Committee, subject to certain specified conditions.||GEM Rule 11.06||Rejection Letter||New Applicants|