Under the Harbour Suites Plan, investors each buy a room in a hotel building. The operator runs the whole building as one hotel; each investor receives the letting income of his own room, so contributions and profits are not pooled. Investors have no day-to-day control. Is the plan a CIS under the SFO?
Paragraph (a) of the CIS definition needs three things: participants lack day-to-day control over the management of the property, whether or not they may be consulted or give directions; the property is managed as a whole by or for the operator, or the contributions and profits are pooled, or both; and the purpose is for participants to share in profits or returns from the property. Limb (ii) is met by management as a whole alone, so pooling is not required. 'Property' includes land, not only securities. A right to be consulted would not take the plan outside the definition, so that is not why it is a CIS. Source: SFO (Cap. 571) Sch. 1 Pt 1, s.1 (collective investment scheme, para (a)(i)-(iii); property) (as at October 2026).
Treating pooling as essential. Management of the property as a whole by the operator is an alternative route into the definition.
Practise more Paper 6 General regulatory framework questions
Exam-style questions with worked answers, then full timed mocks. Free to start.
Build a daily practice habit — a few exam-style questions a day, with worked answers. Free to start.
Start practising →Original study material mapped to the public HKSI Paper 6 syllabus. Unofficial, not endorsed by HKSI Institute or the SFC. Verify figures and rules against current guidance before relying on them.