Digital Assets & Virtual Assets
RWA Tokenisation in Hong Kong: Legal Framework and Structuring Guide

Agentic artificial intelligence — AI systems that perceive their environment, make decisions, and take actions autonomously — is moving rapidly from research labs into commercial deployment. Businesses across finance, legal services, logistics, and real estate are deploying agentic AI to automate workflows, manage counterparty relationships, and execute transactions. This creates legal issues that existing Hong Kong law does not squarely address.
Under Hong Kong contract law, a valid contract requires offer, acceptance, consideration, and the intention to create legal relations between legal persons. AI systems are not legal persons. An AI agent that autonomously negotiates and agrees to a contract does so as agent of the deploying business — which bears full contractual liability for anything the AI agrees to, including agreements that exceed intended scope. Businesses must configure AI systems with clear authority limits and audit AI authorisation before commercial deployment. Vendor agreements should also be reviewed to understand how liability is allocated between deployer and developer.
When an agentic AI causes harm — through a negligent recommendation, incorrect information, or a damaging automated action — the deploying business is the most likely defendant, analogous to an employer's vicarious liability. Where the AI was defectively designed or trained, the developer or vendor may also bear product liability. Businesses should carry adequate professional indemnity and technology E&O insurance, confirm AI-caused harms are covered, and establish human oversight mechanisms with documented audit trails for high-stakes decisions.
Under Hong Kong's Copyright Ordinance, copyright subsists in original works that are the product of human skill and labour. Works generated autonomously by AI without meaningful human creative input may not attract copyright protection at all. The Copyright Ordinance's section 14 provision for computer-generated works assigns authorship to the person who made the arrangements necessary for creation, but its application to outputs from large language models is untested in Hong Kong courts. Businesses relying on AI-generated work product should not assume clear copyright protection.
Agentic AI systems frequently process substantial volumes of personal data, triggering obligations under Hong Kong's PDPO (Cap. 486). The six Data Protection Principles require that data is collected only for lawful purposes, not retained longer than necessary, used only for the purposes collected, secured against unauthorised access, and that individuals are given access and correction rights. Businesses should conduct a Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) before deployment and implement technical and organisational measures to ensure PDPO compliance throughout the AI's lifecycle.
Hong Kong currently has no AI-specific legislation. The government's approach has been principles-based, with the HKMA, SFC, and PCPD issuing guidance within their existing remits. Businesses in regulated sectors should monitor sector regulator guidance closely, and those with EU operations must consider the extraterritorial reach of the EU AI Act.
Before deploying agentic AI commercially, businesses should: conduct a legal risk assessment covering contracts, torts, IP, and data privacy; establish clear authority parameters with human oversight for high-stakes decisions; review and negotiate AI vendor agreements; conduct a PDPO Privacy Impact Assessment; ensure adequate insurance coverage; and establish an audit trail for AI decisions that may later be subject to legal scrutiny.
Alan Wong LLP advises businesses on the legal implications of AI deployment in Hong Kong. Learn more about our AI & Agentic Economy legal services or visit our full capabilities overview to discuss how we can help structure your AI deployment to manage legal risk.
This article is for general information and educational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. Laws and regulatory requirements are subject to change. You should seek independent legal advice in relation to your specific circumstances before taking any action or relying on any information in this article.
EN test
The global RWA market has reached USD 352 billion. But Hong Kong's "same activity, same risk, same regulation" framework imposes material compliance costs on issuers. Alan Wong LLP explains what the regulatory high wall means in practice — and how to navigate it.