第3部份：規管地產代理實務和物業轉易程序的法例

Q1

地產代理公司「恒豐地產」的持牌代理黃建國，在協助客戶陳美玲購買一個位於九龍「翠峰閣」的住宅單位期間，按照《防止洗黑錢及恐怖分子資金籌集條例》（第615章）的要求，收集了陳美玲的個人資料，包括身份證副本及住址證明。交易完成後約十八個月，陳美玲向黃建國提出以下四項要求： (i) 要求恒豐地產確認是否仍然持有其個人資料，並要求查閱該等資料； (ii) 要求恒豐地產更正其檔案內一項不準確的住址記錄； (iii) 要求恒豐地產立即銷毀其所有個人資料，理由是交易已完成； (iv) 要求恒豐地產提供一份說明，列明其個人資料被用於哪些直接促銷用途。 根據《個人資料（私隱）條例》（第486章），下列哪項陳述最為準確？

Licensed estate agent Wong Kin-kwok of 'Hang Fung Properties' collected personal data from his client Chan Mei-ling during a residential property purchase at 'Tsui Fung Court', Kowloon, including a copy of her identity card and proof of address, as required under the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorist Financing Ordinance (Cap. 615). Approximately eighteen months after completion of the transaction, Chan Mei-ling made the following four requests to Wong Kin-kwok: (i) To confirm whether Hang Fung Properties still holds her personal data and to access such data; (ii) To correct an inaccurate address record in her file; (iii) To immediately destroy all her personal data on the grounds that the transaction has been completed; (iv) To provide a statement of the direct marketing purposes for which her personal data has been used. Which of the following statements is most accurate under the Personal Data (Privacy) Ordinance (Cap. 486)?

• A. 要求(i)及(ii)均屬第486章賦予陳美玲的合法權利，恒豐地產須依法回應；要求(iii)不成立，因恒豐地產按第615章的規定，須將客戶盡職審查記錄保留至業務關係結束後最少五年；要求(iv)須視乎陳美玲是否事先訂明不同意其個人資料被用於直接促銷而定。
• B. 要求(i)、(ii)及(iii)均屬第486章賦予陳美玲的合法權利，恒豐地產必須在收到要求後四十日內回應所有三項要求；要求(iv)不在第486章的規管範圍之內。
• C. 要求(i)及(ii)均屬第486章賦予陳美玲的合法權利；要求(iii)成立，因第486章的「資料保留」原則規定，個人資料一旦達到其收集目的，資料使用者須立即銷毀有關資料；要求(iv)不在第486章的規管範圍之內。
• D. 要求(i)、(ii)及(iv)均屬第486章賦予陳美玲的合法權利；要求(iii)不成立，因第486章並無賦予資料當事人強制要求資料使用者銷毀其個人資料的絕對權利，且第615章另有保留規定；恒豐地產可就查閱要求(i)收取合理費用。
• E. 四項要求均屬第486章賦予陳美玲的合法權利，恒豐地產必須無條件接受所有要求，並須在收到要求後四十日內作出回應，否則須面臨刑事檢控。

• A. Requests (i) and (ii) are both legal rights conferred on Chan Mei-ling under Cap. 486, and Hang Fung Properties must respond accordingly; Request (iii) is not valid because Cap. 615 requires that customer due diligence records be retained for at least five years after the end of the business relationship; Request (iv) depends on whether Chan Mei-ling has previously indicated her objection to the use of her personal data for direct marketing purposes.
• B. Requests (i), (ii) and (iii) are all legal rights conferred on Chan Mei-ling under Cap. 486, and Hang Fung Properties must respond to all three requests within forty days of receipt; Request (iv) falls outside the scope of Cap. 486.
• C. Requests (i) and (ii) are both legal rights conferred on Chan Mei-ling under Cap. 486; Request (iii) is valid because the 'data retention' principle under Cap. 486 requires data users to immediately destroy personal data once it has fulfilled its collection purpose; Request (iv) falls outside the scope of Cap. 486.
• D. Requests (i), (ii) and (iv) are all legal rights conferred on Chan Mei-ling under Cap. 486; Request (iii) is not valid because Cap. 486 does not confer an absolute right on data subjects to compel data users to destroy their personal data, and Cap. 615 imposes separate retention obligations; Hang Fung Properties may charge a reasonable fee for the access request under (i).
• E. All four requests are legal rights conferred on Chan Mei-ling under Cap. 486, and Hang Fung Properties must unconditionally comply with all requests and respond within forty days of receipt, failing which it will face criminal prosecution.

顯示答案 / Show Answer

正確答案 / Correct Answer: D

• 根據《個人資料（私隱）條例》（第486章）第18條，資料當事人有權查閱資料使用者是否持有其個人資料及查閱該等資料，資料使用者可就此收取合理費用，並須在四十日內回應。
• 根據第486章第22條，資料當事人有權要求更正不準確的個人資料，資料使用者須採取一切切實可行的步驟，在收到要求後四十日內更正有關資料。
• 第486章並無賦予資料當事人強制要求資料使用者銷毀個人資料的絕對法定權利；此外，《防止洗黑錢及恐怖分子資金籌集條例》（第615章）第20條規定，相關記錄須在業務關係終止後保留至少五年，此保留義務優先於一般資料最小化原則。
• 根據第486章第35C條，資料使用者如擬將個人資料用於直接促銷用途，須事先告知資料當事人並取得其同意；資料當事人有權要求資料使用者停止將其個人資料用於直接促銷。

• Under section 18 of the Personal Data (Privacy) Ordinance (Cap. 486), a data subject has the right to confirm whether a data user holds their personal data and to access such data; the data user may charge a reasonable fee and must respond within forty days.
• Under section 22 of Cap. 486, a data subject has the right to request correction of inaccurate personal data, and the data user must take all practicable steps to correct the data within forty days of receiving the request.
• Cap. 486 does not confer an absolute statutory right on data subjects to compel data users to destroy personal data; furthermore, section 20 of the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorist Financing Ordinance (Cap. 615) requires that relevant records be retained for at least five years after the end of the business relationship, and this retention obligation takes precedence over general data minimisation principles.
• Under section 35C of Cap. 486, a data user intending to use personal data for direct marketing must notify and obtain consent from the data subject beforehand; the data subject has the right to require the data user to cease using their personal data for direct marketing.

Q2

建國（香港永久居民）於2024年3月1日與賣方美玲簽訂臨時買賣合約，以港幣800萬元購入位於九龍旺景道88號的一個住宅單位，並支付相當於樓價5%的臨時訂金。正式買賣合約於同年3月12日簽訂，買賣雙方協議於2024年6月14日完成交易。就上述交易，代理恒豐地產的持牌地產代理偉業亦需協助買方處理從價印花稅（AVD）及相關文件事宜。請問下列哪項陳述就印花稅責任及正式合約加蓋印花的法定時限最為準確？

Kin-kwok (a Hong Kong permanent resident) entered into a Provisional Agreement for Sale and Purchase on 1 March 2024 with seller Mei-ling to purchase a residential unit at Flat 88, Wang King Road, Kowloon for HK$8,000,000, and paid a preliminary deposit equivalent to 5% of the purchase price. The Formal Agreement for Sale and Purchase was signed on 12 March 2024, and the parties agreed to complete the transaction on 14 June 2024. The licensed estate agent Wai-yip of Hang Fung Properties is also required to assist the buyer with matters relating to Ad Valorem Stamp Duty (AVD) and relevant documentation. Which of the following statements is the MOST accurate regarding the stamp duty liability and the statutory time limit for stamping the formal agreement?

• A. 由於建國為香港永久居民且並非公司，可享受第2標準稅率（即樓價之3.75%）；正式買賣合約須於簽訂後30日內加蓋印花，逾期則須繳付罰款。
• B. 由於建國為香港永久居民且並非公司，可享受第2標準稅率（即樓價之3.75%）；正式買賣合約須於簽訂後30日內加蓋印花，但若於完成交易前加蓋印花亦屬合法且無須罰款。
• C. 由於建國為香港永久居民且並非公司，可享受第2標準稅率（即樓價之3.75%）；而正式買賣合約須於簽訂後30日內加蓋印花，惟因本交易完成日期距合約簽訂日期超過30日，故最遲須於完成交易當日前加蓋印花。
• D. 由於建國為香港永久居民且並非公司，可享受第2標準稅率（即樓價之3.75%）；正式買賣合約必須在完成交易當日或之前加蓋印花，否則文件不具法律效力，且須繳付罰款。
• E. 由於建國為香港永久居民且並非公司，可享受第1標準稅率（即樓價之4.25%）；正式買賣合約須於簽訂後30日內加蓋印花，逾期則須繳付罰款。

• A. Since Kin-kwok is a Hong Kong permanent resident and not a company, he is entitled to Scale 2 rates (i.e., 3.75% of the purchase price); the Formal Agreement must be stamped within 30 days of execution, and a penalty will be imposed for late stamping.
• B. Since Kin-kwok is a Hong Kong permanent resident and not a company, he is entitled to Scale 2 rates (i.e., 3.75% of the purchase price); the Formal Agreement must be stamped within 30 days of execution, but stamping before completion is also lawful and penalty-free.
• C. Since Kin-kwok is a Hong Kong permanent resident and not a company, he is entitled to Scale 2 rates (i.e., 3.75% of the purchase price); the Formal Agreement must be stamped within 30 days of execution, but as the completion date exceeds 30 days from the agreement date, it must be stamped no later than the day before completion.
• D. Since Kin-kwok is a Hong Kong permanent resident and not a company, he is entitled to Scale 2 rates (i.e., 3.75% of the purchase price); the Formal Agreement must be stamped on or before the completion date, otherwise the document will have no legal effect and a penalty will be imposed.
• E. Since Kin-kwok is a Hong Kong permanent resident and not a company, he is entitled to Scale 1 rates (i.e., 4.25% of the purchase price); the Formal Agreement must be stamped within 30 days of execution, and a penalty will be imposed for late stamping.

顯示答案 / Show Answer

正確答案 / Correct Answer: A

• 根據《印花稅條例》（Cap. 117）第29條，住宅物業的買賣合約須於簽訂後30日內加蓋印花，逾期須繳付罰款；若文件未加蓋印花，在法庭上不得採納為證據，但不影響文件的法律效力。
• 根據《印花稅條例》（Cap. 117）附表1第2條，香港永久居民（並非公司）以個人名義購入住宅物業，如屬其唯一或首個住宅物業，可按第2標準稅率繳交從價印花稅（AVD），稅率為樓價之1.5%至4.25%不等；就樓價港幣600萬元以上至900萬元以下的物業，稅率為3.75%。
• 選項B混淆了「在完成交易前加蓋印花亦屬合法」的概念：正式合約的法定加蓋印花限期為簽訂後30日，而非完成交易日，在30日期限內無論何時加蓋均不產生罰款，並非「只要在完成前加蓋」即無罰款。

• Under section 29 of the Stamp Duty Ordinance (Cap. 117), an agreement for sale and purchase of residential property must be stamped within 30 days of execution; late stamping attracts a penalty. An unstamped instrument is inadmissible as evidence in court but is not rendered void.
• Under Head 2 of the First Schedule to the Stamp Duty Ordinance (Cap. 117), a Hong Kong permanent resident (not a company) purchasing a residential property in their own name as their sole or first residential property pays AVD at Scale 2 rates. For a property valued between HK$6,000,001 and HK$9,000,000, the applicable rate is 3.75%.
• Option B conflates the concept of 'stamping before completion is lawful': the statutory deadline for stamping a formal agreement is 30 days from execution, not the completion date. Stamping at any point within 30 days attracts no penalty — it is incorrect to say that stamping at any time before completion is penalty-free.

Q3

明星地產有限公司及金龍物業有限公司均為香港知名大型地產代理公司。兩家公司的高層管理人員在一次私人晚宴上達成口頭協議，決定就新界西北區住宅物業的代理佣金率設定相同下限，並同意不以低於該下限的佣金率招攬客戶，藉此避免相互之間的價格競爭。此外，明星地產另行指示其旗下持牌代理，凡發現有準買家同時委託金龍物業代理洽購同一物業單位，須立即向金龍物業查詢有關買家的客戶資料，以便協調跟進安排。就《競爭條例》（第619章）而言，下列哪項陳述最為準確？

Bright Star Realty Limited and Golden Dragon Properties Limited are both well-known large estate agency companies in Hong Kong. Senior management of both companies reached a verbal agreement at a private dinner to set a common minimum commission rate for residential properties in the North-West New Territories, and agreed not to solicit clients at rates below that minimum, thereby avoiding price competition between them. In addition, Bright Star Realty separately instructed its licensed agents that whenever a prospective purchaser was found to have also engaged a Golden Dragon agent to negotiate the purchase of the same property unit, the agent should immediately approach Golden Dragon Properties to obtain that buyer's client information in order to coordinate follow-up arrangements. In respect of the Competition Ordinance (Cap. 619), which of the following statements is the most accurate?

• A. 兩家公司協定佣金下限的行為只有在書面記錄存在的情況下，方構成《競爭條例》第一行為守則下的違規行為，口頭協議不受規管。
• B. 兩家公司協定佣金下限的行為屬《競爭條例》第一行為守則所界定的嚴重反競爭行為，而明星地產要求代理索取競爭對手客戶資料的指示則另外違反第二行為守則，兩項行為可分別導致公司被競爭事務委員會調查及向競爭事務審裁處提出法律程序。
• C. 兩家公司協定佣金下限的行為屬《競爭條例》第一行為守則所界定的嚴重反競爭行為，但明星地產要求代理索取客戶資料的指示僅可能違反《個人資料（私隱）條例》（第486章），與《競爭條例》無關。
• D. 由於地產代理佣金率在香港並無法定標準，兩家公司私下協定相同佣金下限屬正當商業行為，不受《競爭條例》規管，但明星地產要求代理索取客戶資料的指示可能構成第二行為守則下的濫用相當市場權勢行為。
• E. 兩家公司的協議屬《競爭條例》第一行為守則下的輕微違規行為而非嚴重反競爭行為，因為協議僅涉及佣金下限而非統一固定佣金率，競爭事務委員會只能就此發出警告通知而無權向競爭事務審裁處提出法律程序。

• A. The two companies' agreement on a minimum commission rate would only constitute a contravention of the First Conduct Rule under the Competition Ordinance if a written record exists; oral agreements are not regulated.
• B. The two companies' agreement on a minimum commission rate constitutes a serious anti-competitive conduct under the First Conduct Rule of the Competition Ordinance, while Bright Star Realty's instruction to its agents to obtain competitor client information separately contravenes the Second Conduct Rule; both acts may independently lead to investigation by the Competition Commission and proceedings before the Competition Tribunal.
• C. The two companies' agreement on a minimum commission rate constitutes a serious anti-competitive conduct under the First Conduct Rule of the Competition Ordinance, but Bright Star Realty's instruction to obtain client information may only contravene the Personal Data (Privacy) Ordinance (Cap. 486) and is unrelated to the Competition Ordinance.
• D. Since there is no statutory standard for estate agency commission rates in Hong Kong, the two companies' private agreement on a common minimum commission rate is a legitimate business practice not regulated by the Competition Ordinance; however, Bright Star Realty's instruction to its agents to obtain client information may constitute an abuse of substantial market power under the Second Conduct Rule.
• E. The two companies' agreement constitutes a minor contravention rather than a serious anti-competitive conduct under the First Conduct Rule of the Competition Ordinance, because it only involves a commission floor rather than a uniform fixed rate; the Competition Commission can only issue a warning notice and has no power to bring proceedings before the Competition Tribunal.

顯示答案 / Show Answer

正確答案 / Correct Answer: C

• 《競爭條例》（第619章）第6條第一行為守則：禁止具有損害競爭目的或效果的競爭者之間協議，包括固定或協調定價（例如設定佣金下限）；此屬嚴重反競爭行為，無論以口頭或書面方式達成協議均受規管。
• 《競爭條例》（第619章）第21條第二行為守則：禁止具有相當市場權勢的業務實體濫用其市場地位；若涉事公司不具備相當市場權勢，索取競爭對手客戶資料的行為不會自動觸發第二行為守則，但可能同時違反《個人資料（私隱）條例》（第486章）的相關規定。
• 地產代理就佣金率進行橫向協調屬第一行為守則下的嚴重反競爭行為，競爭事務委員會可直接向競爭事務審裁處提出法律程序，毋須事先發出警告通知。

• Section 6 First Conduct Rule of the Competition Ordinance (Cap. 619): prohibits agreements between competitors that have the object or effect of harming competition, including fixing or coordinating prices (e.g. setting a minimum commission floor); this constitutes serious anti-competitive conduct regardless of whether the agreement is oral or written.
• Section 21 Second Conduct Rule of the Competition Ordinance (Cap. 619): prohibits undertakings with substantial market power from abusing that power; if the companies involved do not possess substantial market power, seeking a competitor's client information does not automatically trigger the Second Conduct Rule, but may simultaneously contravene the Personal Data (Privacy) Ordinance (Cap. 486).
• Horizontal coordination by estate agents on commission rates is a serious anti-competitive conduct under the First Conduct Rule; the Competition Commission may bring proceedings directly before the Competition Tribunal without first issuing a warning notice.