asian-mena Counsel - In-House Community · asian-mena Counsel | MAGAZINE FOR THEIN ... Arun Mistry – Director ISSN 2223-8697 ... System Act (CISA), Real Estate Investment Trust

Volume 15 Issue 3, 2017

AN

TI-TRUST &

COM

PETITION

ww

w.in

ho

usecom

munity.com

asian-m

ena C

oun

selasian

-men

a Cou

nsel

| MAGAZINE FOR THE IN-HOUSE COMMUNITY ALONG THE NEW SILK ROAD |

Volume 15 Issue 3, 2017

Anti-Trust&

Competition

Plus ...The Thing About…Jeanette Chan, head of Paul Weiss’s China practice

Investigative IntelligenceAsset searches in the digital age

https://adgm.com/

http://www.lexmundi.com/lexmundi/Asia-Pacific.asp

Editorial Enquiries Tel: ....................... (852) 2542 4279 [email protected]

Advertising & Subscriptions Tel: ...................... (852) 2542 1225 [email protected]

Published 10 times annually by

Pacific Business Press Limited

Room 2008, C C Wu Building, 302-8 Hennessy Road, Wan Chai, Hong Kong S.A.R.

Publishers of• ASIAN-MENA COUNSELTM

Magazine and Weekly Briefing

• IN-HOUSE HANDBOOKTM

Organisers of the• IN-HOUSE CONGRESSTM events

Hosts of• www.inhousecommunity.com• www.mycareerinlaw.com

Forums for the In-House Communityalong the New Silk Road

© 2017 Pacific Business Press Limited and contributors

Opinions expressed herein do not constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publishers.

Nick Ferguson – Managing Editor [email protected]

Leo Yeung – Design Manager [email protected]

Wendy Chan – Global Head of Events [email protected]

Jessica Ng – Events [email protected]

Rahul Prakash – [email protected]

Yvette Tan – Head of Research and Development Manager [email protected]

Yannie Cheung – Office [email protected]

Tim Gilkison – Managing Director [email protected]

Patrick Dransfield – Publishing [email protected]

Arun Mistry – Director

ISSN 2223-8697

Feature contributors

Francis Lim is a senior partner and a member of the executive and special committees of ACCRALaw. He was closely involved in the enactment of several Philippine laws such as the Financial Rehabilitation and Insolvency Act (FRIA), Credit Investment System Act (CISA), Real Estate Investment Trust Act (REITA), Personal Equity Retirement Account Act (PERAA), and the Philippine Competition Act. He was also involved in the formulation of several Philippine procedural rules such as the Interim Rules on Intra-Corporate Controversies, Rules on Electronic Evidence, Rules on Notarial Practice, Rules on DNA Evidence, Financial Rehabilitation Rules of Procedure, and the Financial Liquidation and Suspension of Payments Rules of Procedure.

Michael Gu is a founding partner and a principal competition partner at AnJie Law Firm. As a competition law pioneer in China, he has secured merger clearance from the Ministry of Commerce for more than 60 merger transactions, including the first merger filing under the Anti-Monopoly Law. Gu frequently represents clients in high-profile antitrust investigation proceedings, antitrust civil litigations and leniency programmes.

Eric Recalde is a tax and corporate and special projects partner in ACCRALaw. He is an accomplished legal writer having published several books: A Treatise on Tax Principles and Remedies (2009, 2015), The Philippine Local Tax and Tariff and Customs Laws (2011) and The Philippine Internal Revenue Taxes (2014). Together with Francis Lim, he published The Philippine Competition Act: Salient Points and Emerging Issues (2016).

Search by Practice and Industry at www.inhousecommunity.com

FIND A LAWYER ...

... AND SEND THEM AN

mailto:[email protected]











http://www.inhousecommunity.com

http://www.mycareerinlaw.com


http://www.inhousecommunity.com/find-a-lawyer/

2 www.inhousecommunity.com

In this issue Volume 15 Issue 3, 2017

JURISDICTION UPDATESKey legal developments affecting the In-House Community along the New Silk Road

4 RBI issues directions on peer-to-peer lending platforms

By Vineet Aneja and Abhishek Singla of Clasis Law

6 New regulation on guidelines and procedures for the

implementation of investment climate development

activities

By Dini Retnoningsih of Lubis Ganie Surowidjojo

8 Malaysia introduces audit exemption for certain private

companies

By Norhisham Abd Bahrin of Azmi & Associates

12

06

ANTI-TRUST andCOMPETITIONSpecial Report

26 Asia’s evolving competition landscape After a period of rapid adoption of competition laws in Asia, only Bhutan and

North Korea are compliance safe spaces, writes Nick Ferguson.

28 Anti-monopoly enforcement in China’s healthcare industry Companies involved in the manufacture and sale of active pharmaceuticalingre-

dients are in the spotlight as Chinese authorities prepare an anti-monopoly wind-storm, write Michael Gu and Sihui Sun of AnJie Law Firm.

32 Towards robust yet balanced competition in the Philippines The Philippine Competition Commission is taking strides towards a competition

law regime that is responsive to business while still promoting competition, write Francisco Lim and Eric Recalde of ACCRA Law Offices


3 Volume 15 Issue 3, 2017

14

Asian-mena Counsel is grateful for the continued editorial contributions of:

10 Protection of women employees in the Philippines

By Paulo N Rabanal of ACCRA Law Offices

12 Big data ownership and regulation

By Hong Mi-Ok of Lee International IP & Law Group

14 New decree for registration of security measures

By Dao Phuong Linh of Indochine Counsel

16 The Briefing

Along with the latest moves and jobs, we put the spotlight on China

Literature’s US$1.1 billion Hong Kong IPO and review our latest

events in Hong Kong and Shanghai.

23 Investigative Intelligence:

Asset searches in the digital age

Social media and other technology are changing the way asset

searches are conducted in a dispute, writes Reshmi Khurana of Kroll.

36 The Thing About… Jeanette Chan

The managing partner of the China practice and head of the

communications and technology practice at Paul Weiss discusses

disruption, diversity and the changing legal landscape in China.

40 Asian-mena Counsel Direct

Important contact details at your fingertips.

36

32

28


INDIA

Online lending transactions are in their nascent stage in India and given the

increase in peer-to-peer (P2P) lending through e-commerce marketplace it is of extreme importance to regulate such trans-actions. Accordingly, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has recently issued “Master Directions – Non-Banking Financial Company – Peer to Peer Lending Platform (Reserve Bank) Directions, 2017” (“Directions”) to regulate company that carry on the business of P2P lending plat-form (P2P lending platform) in India.

One of the main elements of the Directions is the mechanism specified in relation to the registration of a P2P lending platform. As per the Directions, an existing/prospective P2P lending platform is permit-ted to carry its business if the following con-ditions are fulfilled:(i) it is a company;(ii) it has a net owned fund of not less than

Rs20 million or such higher amount as RBI may specify; and

(iii) it has obtained a certificate of registration from RBI.The Directions make it mandatory for

an existing P2P lending platform to obtain registration within three months from the effective date, being October 4, 2017.

A P2P lending platform is permitted to engage in various activities, such as:(i) provide online marketplace to the par-

ticipants involved in P2P lending thereby acting as an intermediary;

(ii) conduct due diligence on the participants and credit assessment and risk profiling of the borrowers; and

(iii) undertake loan documentation.In terms of restrictions, a P2P lending

RBI issues Directions on Peer to Peer Lending Platform

By Vineet Aneja and Abhishek Singla

platform is barred from carrying out various activities, such as:(i) raising deposits, lending on its own and

permitting international flow of funds; and(ii) cross-selling of product (except for loan-

specific insurance products) and provid-ing/arranging any credit enhancement or credit guarantee.A P2P lending platform is required to put

in place a board-approved policy to address grievances/complaints of participants. In case a complaint is not redressed within a period of one month, the participant shall have the right to appeal to the Customer Education and Protection Department of RBI.

In terms of prudential norms, the Directions states that the aggregate exposure of a lender to (i) all borrowers across all P2Ps lending platforms should not exceed Rs1 mil-lion; and (ii) a single borrower across all P2P lending platforms should not exceed Rs50,000. Also, the aggregate loans which can be availed by a borrower across all P2Ps lending platforms have been capped to Rs1 million. Additionally, the maturity of loans obtained through P2P lending platform can-not exceed 36 months. To monitor the above exposure limits, a P2P lending platform is required to obtain a certificate from bor-

rower and lender, as applicable, which states that the limits prescribed above have been adhered to by the respective participant.

The Directions clearly specify the fund transfer mechanism which needs to be adopted by a P2P lending platform for the purpose of running the business of P2P lend-ing. At least two escrow accounts need to be set up and maintained, wherein one account is for funds received from lenders and the other account for funds collected from the borrowers. The escrow accounts shall be operated by a trustee, which shall be pro-moted by the bank maintaining the escrow accounts.

Any takeover/acquisition of control of a P2P lending platform or any change in share-holding of a P2P lending platform that results in acquisition of 26 percent or more of the paid-up equity capital of the P2P lending platform would require prior written consent of RBI. Further, any change in management of a P2P lending platform that results in a change in more than 30 percent of the direc-tors (excluding independent directors) or any change in shareholding that gives the acquirer a right to nominate a director shall also require prior written consent of RBI. Subsequent to the receipt of approval from RBI. P2P lending platform and other con-cerned parties would have to give a public notice of change in management/control at least 30 days before such change is made effective.

To monitor the functioning and smooth running of P2P lending platform, RBI has also stipulated certain reporting requirements in the Directions.

The Directions mainly aim at establishing a constructive set of norms that would gov-ern the process of establishing and the func-tioning of P2P lending platform in India. Given the growing popularity of online lend-ing transactions in the country, it was neces-sary to regulate P2P lending platform.

14th Floor, Gopal Das Bhawan, 28, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi 110 001IndiaTel: (91) 11 4213 0000 / Fax: (91) 11 4213 0099E : [email protected] • [email protected] W: www.clasislaw.com

“The Directions mainly aim at

establishing a constructive set of

norms that would govern the

process of establishing and the

functioning of P2P lending

platform in India”

JURISDICTION UPDATES



http://www.clasislaw.com



INDONESIA

BackgroundThe head of the Indonesian Investment Coordinating Board (Badan Koordinasi Penanaman Modal – BKPM) issued Regulation No. 9 of 2017 on Guidelines and Procedures for the Implementation of Investment Climate Development Activities (BKPM Regulation No. 9/2017). The BKPM Regulation No. 9/2017 is issued in order to implement the provisions under Article 16 (1) and (2) of Law No. 23 of 2014 on Regional Government, which mandate the central government to arrange norms, standards, proce-dures and criteria for the implementation of investment climate development activities.

Scope BKPM Regulation No.9/2017BKPM Regulation No. 9/2017 sets out as a set of guidelines for the officials at the BKPM, and The One Stop Integrated Service and Investment Agency (Dinas Penanaman Modal dan Pelayanan Terpadu Satu Pintu or DPMPTSP) at the provincial/regency/city level (together hereinafter referred to as “Government”) with regard to the develop-ment of the investment climate by implementing several activities as stipulated under Article 4 of BKPM Regulation No. 9/2017, comprises:1. investment deregulation;2. development of investment potential and

opportunities; and3. business empowerment.

Investment deregulationArticle 5 of BKPM Regulation No. 9/2017 stipu-lates that in order to offer improved and simplified investment process for investors, the Government is authorised to implement several investment deregulation activities which comprised of the fol-lowing activities:1. drafting proposal on policy and/or law and

regulation proposals with regard to the Investment and the evaluation of such invest-ment implementation;

New regulation on guidelines and procedures for the implementation of investment climate development activities

2. drafting proposal on incentive policy, simplifica-tion and facility of Investment;

3. drafting proposal for policies on the business simplification, procedural simplification, and timeframe and cost for licensing and non-licensing; and

4. socialising information on policies and/or laws and regulations relating to investment to the central government, regional government, city, business practitioners and stakeholders within the investment sector.

Development of investment potential and opportunitiesAccording to Article 10 of BKPM Regulation No. 9/2017, development of investment potential and opportunity at the regional level can be imple-mented through: the identification of investment potential; the mapping of investment opportuni-ties; and the documentation of the mapping results of such investment opportunities into the Regional Investment Potential Information System (Sistem Informasi Potensi Investasi Daerah or SIPID).

Identification of investment potential is regu-lated under Article 11 of BKPM Regulation No. 9/2017, which stipulates that identification of regional investment potential can be conducted by collecting data and information on investment potential which includes information on geogra-phy, demographics, economic condition, invest-ment and supporting facilities and infrastructure and major commodity; and analysing the data and information on investment potential.

Furthermore, Article 12 of BKPM Regulation No. 9/2017 stipulates provisions on the mapping of investment opportunities, which can be con-ducted through:1. Verification of the results from the analysis of

investment potential;2. Analysis of the results of verification of invest-

ment potential data and information which are

supported by study results and site visit; and3. Drafting of regional investment opportunities

maps.As for documentation of the mapping results of

investment opportunities, Article 14 of BKPM Regulation No. 9/2017 stipulates that these activ-ities are conducted through the recording and updating of business potential mapping results and regional profiles which have been implemented by BKPM and the Investment Unit and DPMPTSP at the provincial/regency/city-level. Business empowermentPursuant to Article 1 (11) of BKPM Regulation No. 9/2017, Business Empowerment is defined as an effort to facilitate the guidance and counsel-ling, national business services, and partnership with small, medium and large-scale business. Article 15 of BKPM Regulation No. 9/2017 stipu-lates that such Business Empowerment can be executed through implementing these several activities:1. Facilitating the implementation of business

management guidance for small and medium scale businesses. By providing this business management guidance, the Government aims to increase the position of small and medium scale businesses into large scale businesses, therefore they will be ready to be partnered up with foreign/domestic investment compa-nies across Indonesian territory (see Article 16 (2) of BKPM Regulation No. 9/2017);

2. Facilitating the implementation of small and medium scale business partnerships with for-eign/domestic investment companies with the objectives to achieve partnerships between small and medium scale business under a fair economy across Indonesian territory (see Article 17 (2) of BKPM Regulation No. 9/2017);

3. Facilitating the capacities improvement of small and medium scale businesses with the objec-tives to provide solutions for business in order to be able to partnered up with foreign and domestic investment companies across Indonesian territory (see Art. 18 (2) of BKPM Regulation No. 9/2017).BKPM Regulation No. 9/2017 has been effec-

tive since August 30, 2017.

Menara Imperium, 30th Fl. Jl. H.R. Rasuna Said, Kav. 1 Jakarta 12980, IndonesiaTel: (62-21) 831-5005, 831-5025 / Fax: (62-21) 831-5015, 831-5018E: [email protected] • [email protected] W: www.lgslaw.co.id

By Dini Retnoningsih





http://www.lgslaw.co.id


MALAYSIA

The growth of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) has played a significant

role in the process of industrialisation world-wide. To support the growth of SMEs, an audit exemption regime has been implemented in various advanced countries, such as Singapore and the UK.

Malaysia introduces audit exemption for certain private companies

In Malaysia, Section 267(1) of the Companies Act 2016 mandates every private company to appoint an auditor for each financial year of the company for purposes of auditing its financial statements. Notwithstanding this, Section 267(2) of the Companies Act 2016 empowers the Registrar of Companies to

exempt any private company from auditing its financial statements.

On August 4, 2017, the Companies Commission of Malaysia (CCM) has brought into force audit exemption for certain catego-ries of private companies. The Companies Commission of Malaysia has issued Practice Directive No. 3/2017 to set out the qualify-ing criteria for private companies to be exempted from appointing an auditor for a financial year.

By Norhisham Abd Bahrin

T: 603 2118 5000 Ext 5016 E: [email protected] W: www.azmilaw.com

Categories of private companies that qualify for audit exemption

This audit exemption allows startups and SMEs to enjoy cost-savings in the running of their business since appointment of auditors is no longer necessary.

Issues to considerAudit-exempt companies will still be required to prepare unaudited financial statements and lodge them with the CCM except that the audit-exempt companies can choose to not have those financial statements audited. However, the board is still required to rely on audit/accounting firms to prepare the unaudited financial statements in accordance with the approved accounting standards and the Malaysian Accounting Standards Board (MASB). The unaudited financial statement must be cir-culated to the board members in accordance with the Companies Act 2016. Hence, it may not make much of a difference from a full audit

exercise if one is to look from a cost perspec-tive.

Furthermore, the Inland Revenue Board (IRB) requires all companies to report their income based on audited accounts. However, it remains to be seen whether the IRB will handle tax returns submitted based on unaudited accounts differently.

As a result of audit exemption for certain private companies, it is uncertain as to how banks and other financial institutions will alter their current practice of requiring audited accounts to be submitted together with applica-tions for financial facilities and for maintaining financial facilities and whether such institutions will still require that audited accounts to be submitted.

The Malaysian Institute of Accountants (MIA) is in favour of audit exemptions for dor-mant companies only but not for other small

companies. According to MIA, the significance of an audit cannot be taken lightly. Audit helps the management to maintain an effective system of internal controls and deters fraud, money laundering and other illegal activities. Audit-exemption will result in the situation where the accuracy of financial information in unaudited financial statements filed with CCM become questionable. As a consequence, this will cause increase monitoring, compliance and enforce-ment cost to CCM. In fact, Hong Kong does not allow audit exemption for small private compa-nies, except for dormant companies.

In conclusion, the introduction of audit-exemption brings Malaysia to be in line with other advanced countries such as Singapore, the UK and Australia. Considering the issues raised above, it remains to be seen whether the introduction of audit-exemption in Malaysia is a step forward.

Category Qualifying criteria Effective date

Dormant company

• It has been dormant from the time of its incorporation; or• It is dormant throughout the current financial year and in the immediate

preceding financial year.

A new company formed from January 31, 2017 onwards is immediately eligible.For an existing company, election is available from September 1, 2017.

Zero-revenue company

• It does not have any revenue during the current financial year;• It does not have any revenue in the immediate past two financial years;

and• Its total assets in the current Statement of Financial Position does not

exceed M$300,000, as well as in the FS of the immediate past two financial years.

Election is available from January 1, 2018.

Threshold qualified

• It has revenue not exceeding M$100,000 during the current financial year and in the immediate past two financial years;

• Its total assets in the current Statement of Financial Position (FS) does not exceed M$300,000 and in the immediate past two financial years; and

• It has, at the end of its current financial year and in each of its immediate past two financial years end, not more than five employees.

Election is available from July 1, 2018.




http://www.azmilaw.com


pregnant and are allowed to engage in night work. Additionally, employers must provide women workers an alternative to night work before and after childbirth for a period of at least 16 weeks weeks. To protect the secu-rity of tenure of women workers contem-plated in this article, the law provides that they cannot be dismissed except for just and authorised causes that are not related to pregnancy, childbirth and childcare responsi-bilities.

Further, the law grants women a mater-nity leave. Although men employees are likewise granted a paternity leave, there are substantial differences between the two benefits. Maternity leave is available to women employees regardless of civil status, while the paternity leave is only available to men employees who are married. The more notable difference is the leave period, as the maternity leave may be for a maxi-mum period of 60 or 78 days, while the paternity leave is only up to seven days maximum. On top of this, the Senate has recently approved Senate Bill 1305 or the “Expanded Maternity Leave Law of 2017”, which seeks to extend the grant of maternity leave to 120 days. In addition, women employees are granted special leaves under Republic Act No. 9262 or the “Anti-Violence

PHILIPPINES

According to the World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap (GGG)

Report conducted in 2016, the Philippines is the most gender-equal country in the Asia-Pacific region, having closed nearly 79 per-cent of its gender gap. The GGG Index ranks 144 countries on the gap between women and men based on indicators such as economic leadership, workforce partici-pation, education, political leadership and health-related factors.

This may be attributed to the principle embodied in the 1987 Constitution recog-nising “the role of women in nation building and [ensuring] the fundamental equality before the law of women and men”. Pursuant to this, there has been much effort to ensure that equal opportunities are given to men and women employees. This is evi-dent in labour and social legislation, where a number of laws and government issuances afford women not only equal opportunities with men, but also more protection and safeguards.

For example, under the Labour Code, specifically under “Working Conditions for Special Groups of Employees”, a separate chapter discusses the special circumstances to be considered in the employment of women. Article 130 of the Labour Code requires that certain facilities are required to be provided for women to ensure their safety and health. Articles 133 to 136 pro-vide safeguards for women employees by, among others, declaring acts of discrimina-tion against women and certain prohibited acts, as unlawful.

Likewise under Article 158 of the Labour Code, measures shall be taken to ensure the well-being of women workers who are

Protection of women employees in the Philippines

ACCRALAW Tower, 2nd Ave. Cor. 30th St., Bonifacio Global CityTaguig City, Metro Manila, PhilippinesTel: (632) 830-8000, / Fax (632) 4037007 or (632) 4037008E: [email protected] W: www.accralaw.com

Against Women and Their Children Act of 2004” and under Republic Act No. 9710 or “The Magna Carta of Women”.

On August 25, 2017, the Secretary of the Department of Labour and Employment issued Department Order 178-17 (DO 178), which aims to address the health con-cerns encountered by employees whose jobs require continuous standing or frequent walking. Under DO 178, companies are banned from mandating their women employees to wear shoes with more than 2.5cm high heels, making the Philippines the first country in Asia where the mandatory wearing of high-heeled shoes is banned.

Finally, there are a number of pending bills in the Congress that aim to strengthen the curb on discrimination against women in the workplace by seeking to expand the prohibited acts of discrimination.

While the strides towards gender bal-ance are commendable, it is important to consider, however, the other side of the scale, ie the employers, so as not to grant protection to women employees to the extent of giving overbalanced or preferential treatment. The requirements provided by the law may be too burdensome for the employers that they may think twice before hiring women employers. In pushing for more benefits and protection favouring women workers, a possible backlash may occur and diminish the hiring of women employees, effectively running counter to the intention of the law. As such, there is nothing wrong with coming up with more legislations favourable to women, but it is also imperative that a careful contemplation on the implications of such must first be done.

This article first appeared in Business World, a newspaper of general circulation in the Philippines.

“Under DO 178, companies are

banned from mandating their

women employees to wear

shoes with more than 2.5cm

high heels”

By Paulo N Rabanal



http://www.accralaw.com



On October 16, 2017, the US Supreme Court decided to hear a case in which

Microsoft refused to submit requested data to US law enforcement authorities for a criminal investigation. The Court’s decision will likely centre on who owns the data and what rights can be claimed relating to the data. Whether the Court grants priority rights to data providers or to companies using and analysing big data will have a sig-nificant global impact on competitiveness and data sovereignty.

As we enter the fourth industrial revolu-tion, we are witnessing a data technology revolution where companies utilise and ana-lyse big data and use that analysis to provide services customised to each customer. Big data enables companies to extract valuable information and to respond to or predict future changes based on the extracted infor-mation. Big data is the foundation for a digital market platform that helps companies better understand customers and provide custom-ised content. If a company develops such a platform using big data and succeeds in offer-ing more accurate and targeted services for customers, it will have an increased oppor-tunity to dominate a digital market. Knowing this, many companies around the world fiercely compete against each other to stay ahead of their competitors.

The Korean government traditionally has adhered to a policy of protecting privacy. Personal information can be collected to the minimum extent necessary and collection of sensitive information generally is limited. Additionally, personal information handlers

must perform security measures (access rights management, access control system operation, encryption of personal informa-tion, prevention of malicious programs, destruction of personal information) to pre-vent personal information from being lost, stolen or damaged. In the event of an unau-thorised disclosure in violation of these obli-gations, criminal penalties may be imposed on the personal information handler.

Revisions to the existing data protection acts pending in the National Assembly are focused on further protecting personal infor-mation by dealing with, among other things, preventing misuse of personal information and active engagement by the Personal Information Dispute Mediation Committee.

Additionally, the Korean “Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilisation and Information Protection, Etc” (Information

SOUTH KOREA

Big data ownership and regulation

Poongsan Bldg. 23 Chungjeongro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 03737, Korea Tel: 82 2 2262 6288 / Fax: 82 2 2279 5020E: [email protected] W: www.leeinternational.com

Communications Network Act) aims to pre-vent damage from a massive leak of personal information while maximising efficiency in data distribution. The act imposes on provid-ers of information communication services additional obligations such as data communi-cation security and control of harmful infor-mation. Revisions to this act, pending in the National Assembly, also address improving de-identification, personal information pro-tection and control of harmful information.

Recently the Korean government pub-lished “Guidelines on Personal Information De-identification,” and it is requiring such measures to be used. These guidelines impose an obligation to explore methods for de-identification (a way of eliminating any possibility of determining one’s identity from certain data) and anonymisation. Companies should note that once big data becomes de-identified, it cannot be transformed back into identifiable data.

Notwithstanding this trend toward greater regulation by the Korean govern-ment, the Korean big data market still grew to W262.3 billion in 2015, an increase of more than 30 percent over the previous year. Given that the market is in its infancy in Korea, such growth is quite noticeable.

Because the data market continues to rise rapidly due to the data technology revo-lution, companies will need to be vigilant in monitoring the direction in which each country’s big data regulations will go. For those operating in Korea, they should take note of the Korean government’s strength-ening stance on personal information pro-tection and companies should find ways to protect personal information in compliance with the government’s requirements.

“The Korean government

traditionally has adhered to

a policy of protecting

privacy. Personal information

can be collected to the

minimum extent necessary

and collection of sensitive

information generally is

limited”

Find the Asian-mena Counsel JURISDICTION UPDATES archived at

www.inhousecommunity.com

By Hong Mi-Ok



http://www.leeinternational.com






1. Mortgage of assets being movable assets other than those which must be registered;

2. Mortgage of assets attached to land to be formed in the future; and

3. Reservation of ownership in a case of purchase and sale of assets attached to land or of assets attached to land to be formed in the future, purchase and sale of an aircraft or ship, and purchase and sale of other movable assets with reservation of ownership.Registration for these security assets will

be made with the Centre for Registration of Assets and Transactions under the National Registration Agency for Secured Transactions under the Ministry of Justice.

Registration file and proceduresDecree 102 simplifies administrative procedures and improves transparency and publicity in registration of security measures.

The registration file for a secured transaction can be lodged by one of the following methods: online registration system, lodged directly (in person), sent by post or sent by email if the applicant has been issued with a code to use the security database.

Upon receipt of the proper application dossier, the registration authority must resolve a registration file on the same day as the application file is received. If a file is received after 3pm, registration shall be completed on the following working day. And if it is necessary to prolong the time-limit for processing a file, then such extended time-limit must not exceed three working days.

The government recently issued a decree to streamline the procedures and

requirements for registration of security measures, and improve information disclosure for secured assets.

Decree No. 102/2017/ND-CP on registration of security measures was issued on September 1, 2017 and took effect on October 15, 2017 and replaced Decree No. 83/2010/ND-CP dated July 23, 2010.

Security measures subject to manda-tory registration1. Mortgage of land-use rights (LURs): This

must be registered with a branch of Land Registration Office (LRO) or LRO under the provincial Department of Natural Resources and Environment (in provinces without an LRO, the LUR Registration Office will be in charge of registration);

2. Mortgage of assets attached to land where ownership of such assets is certified in the certificate of land-use rights and ownership of the residential house and other assets attached to the land: Registration must be made with the LRO or the LUR Registration Office;

3. Pledge or mortgage of an aircraft: This must be registered with the Civil Aviation Authority of Vietnam under the Ministry of Transport (MOT); and

4. Mortgage of a ship: Registration must be made with the Vietnam Maritime Authority, local Maritime Authority or local Maritime Administration under Vietnam Maritime Administration under the MOT.

Security measures for which registra-tion can be made upon request

New decree for registration of security measures

Ho Chi Minh City Office – Unit 305, 3rd Floor, CentecTower72 -74 Nguyen Thi Minh Khai, District 3, Ho Chi Minh City, VietnamTel: (84) 28 3823 9640 / Fax: (84) 28 3823 9641Hanoi Office – Unit 705, 7th Floor, CMC Tower, Duy Tan Street, Cau Giay District, Hanoi, VietnamTel: (84) 24 3795 5261 / Fax: (84) 24 3795 5262 / Moblie: (84) 168 759 1338E: [email protected] W: www.indochinecounsel.com

Effective time of registration for secu-rity measuresThe regulations on the effective time of registration for security measures under Decree 102 are different from Decree 83 as follows:1. For registration of security measures over

LURs, assets attached to land, an aircraft or a ship, the effective time of registration for the security measures is the time when the registration authority enters the registration contents into the register.

2. In the case of registration for a change due to an addition of security assets without signing any new security contract, or of a secured obligation that at the time of signing, the parties did not agree on security for obligations arising in the future, then the effective time of registration for the security measures applicable to the additional asset or additional [secured] obligation is the time when the registration authority enters the changed registration items into the register or enters them into the database.

3. The effective time of registration for security measures shall not be changed in the case of transition from registration of the mortgage of an asset right arising from a contract for the purchase and sale of residential housing to registration of a mortgage of such house to be formed in the future; or transition from registration of a mortgage of an asset right arising from a contract for sale and purchase of a house to registration of a mortgage of the house as such house to be formed in the future has already been formed in accordance with the Law on Residential Housing. The effective time of registration for security measures in those cases is the time of registration of the mortgage of the asset right arising from the contract for sale and purchase of the house.

VIETNAM

By Dao Phuong Linh



http://www.indochinecounsel.com



Adapting to the changing in-house role can be a challenge. Increasingly, law-

yers are expected to be much more actively involved in risk management, technology, strategy and project manage-ment — and they are looking to external law firms to help with the process of change.

This was the topic up for discussion at the plenary panel of the 19th annual In-House Community Congress in Hong Kong last week. Taking part in the ses-sion were Stephanie Cheung, chief legal officer for Melco Resorts & Entertain-ment; Crystal Lalime, managing director and head of global markets legal, Asia Pacific, at Credit Suisse; Tom Glasgow, investment manager, Asia, IMF Bentham; Martin Rogers, partner, Davis Polk; Chew Seng Kok, managing director, Zico Hold-ings; and moderator Patrick Dransfield, publishing director of Asian-mena Coun-sel and co-director of In-House Com-munity.

The discussion was put into context by an engaging presentation on the rise of in-house lawyers and the changing nature of the role by former GC, Peter Connor, CEO and founder of Alternatively Legal.

Of all the changes facing the industry, the panellists agreed that technology, in particular, is moving at a pace that is likely to produce surprises during the next five to 10 years. But deploying tech solutions within an in-house legal team can be daunting for lawyers with no background or expertise in managing such a process. How to get started?

Don’t begin with the technology, was Lalime’s recommendation. Instead, legal teams should think about the processes first. The most repetitive and mundane tasks are the low-hanging fruit for auto-mation — and are also the jobs where your human staff add the least value. Having identified these processes, this will create a much easier starting point for a discussion with the tech staff within the organisation.

Rogers agreed that it is wasteful to tie up expensive lawyers with processes such as billing and document review, both for in-house and private practice teams.

Even so, not all investments in tech-nology will work out. One panellist dis-cussed an artificial intelligence solution for drafting seemingly simple contracts that achieved an underwhelming 98% inac-curacy after a year of development. The lesson: be willing to fail, but make sure that you fail fast and move on.

We also heard from the panel that the role of non-lawyers is becoming increas-ingly important for in-house teams. In particular, people with expertise in deliv-ery, technology, stakeholder management and project management. The ability to frame the team’s requirements in a way that business teams can understand can make a significant difference — and can be much simpler than trying to re-train lawyers to speak the language of business.

While many legal teams are trying to retain more work in-house, there are some new areas where it makes sense to rely on external firms. One example is

regulatory risk forecasting. Law firms that regularly speak to clients and regulators across your industry are well placed to provide this much more efficiently than can be done in-house — and it should be a standard service provided by firms, argued Rogers, while Chew stressed the importance of local insights in markets such as Asean.

The panel took to the stage after a welcome address by Emerico De Guzman, managing partner of Angara Abello Concepcion Regala & Cruz Law Offices, looking at recent legal develop-ments in the Philippines.

Other highlights of the day for the over 400 attending In-House Community members included workshops covering a wide range of subjects, such as interna-tional arbitration, China’s Belt-and-Road scheme, US enforcement of sanctions, crisis management, value creation through intellectual property and multidisciplinary platforms for alternative legal solutions in Asean.

Thanks to all our speakers and co-hosts, including: Addleshaw Goddard; Angara Abello Concepcion Regala & Cruz Law Offices (ACCRALAW); AWA Asia; Axiom; Clyde & Co; Conyers Dill & Pear-man; Davis Polk & Wardwell; Debevoise & Plimpton; Fangda Partners; the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre; Hughes-Castell; IMF Bentham; Lewis Sanders; Mintz Group; Oldham, Li & Nie Lawyers; Taylor Root; and ZICO Holdings for their support of this In-House Com-munity gathering.

Benchmarking the in-house team’s evolution

EVENT REPORTS

A full house of in-house at our 19th annual Hong Kong In-House Congress

THE BRIEFING



A special thanks on behalf of the In-House Community™ to all our speakers, which included:

Chan May MayCEOZICO Insource

Anna ChanPartner, Dispute ResolutionOldham, Li & Nie Lawyers

Stephanie CheungChief Legal OfficerMelco Resorts & Entertainment

Chen ZhuCounsel – Registered Foreign LawyerDavis Polk & Wardwell

Xiaofan ChenPartnerAWA Asia Limited

Jonathan ChangCounsel – Registered Foreign LawyerDavis Polk & Wardwell

Fabian RodayAssociateFangda Partners

Peibing QiPartnerFangda Partners

Jessica PymanPartner, Hong KongMintz Group

Wesley PangManaging CounselHong Kong International Arbitration Centre

Paul SubramaniamChief Risk Officer and Head of Knowledge Management and TrainingZICO Knowledge Services

Patrick SinclairPartnerDavis Polk & Wardwell

Philip RohlikInternational CounselDebevoise & Plimpton

Martin Rogers PartnerDavis Polk & Wardwell

Patrick ZhengPartner, BeijingClyde & Co

Dennis WongPartner, Beijing /Hong KongClyde & Co

Matthew TownsendLegal ManagerPeter Yuen & Associates in Association with Fangda Partners

Sharon TanPartnerZICO Law Malaysia

Ai-Leen LimCEO and Principal CounselAWA Asia Limited

Jonathan LamAssociate, Dispute ResolutionOldham, Li & Nie Lawyers

Crystal LalimeManaging Director and Head of Global Markets Legal - Asia PacificCredit Suisse

Mark JohnsonPartnerDebevoise & Plimpton

Peter ConnorCEO and FounderAlternatively Legal

Ian CockingPartner / Head of Construction, Hong KongClyde & Co

Anna ChongPartnerConyers Dill & Pearman

Chew Seng KokManaging DirectorZICO Holdings Inc.

Tom GlasgowInvestment Manager (Asia)IMF Bentham

Tim GilkisonManaging DirectorIn-House Community

Nigel FrancisHead of Region - Asia Dispute Resolution Addleshaw Goddard

David EngelHead of Reputation & Information ProtectionAddleshaw Goddard

Lauren EllisonSupervising CounselTelstra Global Enterprise & Services

Patrick DransfieldPublishing Director Asian-mena Counsel and Co-DirectorIn-House Community

Alex De MirandaLegal ConsultantAxiom

Emerico O. De GuzmanManaging PartnerAngara Abello Concepcion Regala & Cruz Law Offices (ACCRALAW)

Bill NovomisleFounder and Chief Design OfficerIn-Gear Legalytics Limited

Lars NilssonPartner - European Patent AttorneyAWA Asia Limited

Nigel Meeson QCPartner and Head of the Asia Disputes & Restructuring GroupConyers Dill & Pearman

Andy MeehanGlobal Financial Crimes Legal Advisory, Asia PacificMorgan Stanley

Damien McDonaldPartnerPeter Yuen & Associates in Association with Fangda Partners

Stephen ManVP and General Counsel – APACeBay

Yanhua LinPartnerFangda Partners

Gary LimCEOShakeUp Online

“Very inspiriational speakers. Thank you!”

– Hong Kong Congress delegate


The importance of being a “proactive in-house counsel” and knowing your

business were just a couple of the many takeaways from the opening plenary dis-cussion at the 17th Shanghai In-House Community Congress, with corporate China’s increasingly important role as an “exporter of innovation” informing the discussion.

Over 200 counsel assembled for the annual gathering of the city’s in-house community on October 26 at the Renais-sance Shanghai Pudong for a day of lively discussion and informed presentations on

issues as diverse as antitrust compliance, managing “recovery-led” investigations, maritime law, China crude oil futures, anti-corruption enforcement, arbitration, investment risk, employee misconduct, China’s Cybersecurity Law, customs vol-untary disclosure, and litigation strategies.

Thanks go to all our speakers and co-hosts (listed below) as well as Hughes-Castell and Taylor Root for their support of this important meeting.

“Thank you. A great event!” – Shanghai delegate

Innovation to the fore at 17th In-House Community Congress Shanghai

Victor SunGeneral CounselCisco China

Sun XingLawyerKing & Wood Mallesons

Xudong TaoPartnerJunHe LLP

Weiyang TangPartnerJunHe LLP

Helen TangSenior AssociateHerbert Smith Freehills

Patrick ZhengPartner, BeijingClyde & Co

Efar ZhouAssociateMHP Law Firm

Jeffrey YangSenior Associate, Energy & Natural Resources GroupReed Smith

Yu FengPartnerKing & Wood Mallesons

Howard WangPrincipal, Compliance, Forensics and Intelligence, Greater China and North AsiaControl Risks

Nan WangVice President & Assistant General CounselMarriott International, Inc.

Blake YangSenior AssociateMHP Law Firm

Weiwen WangVice President, Legal - Business Reputation and Responsibility, Greater ChinaIHG

Xia YibinPartnerAnJie Law Firm

Philip RohlikInternational CounselDebevoise & Plimpton

May LuPartner, Employment, ShanghaiSimmons & Simmons

Wesley PangManaging CounselHong Kong International Arbitration Centre

Yang LiuPartnerClyde & Co Westlink JLV

Fiona LoughreyHead of Asia Employment Group, Hong KongSimmons & Simmons

Cong LiuLegal ConsultantReed Smith

Martin HuManaging PartnerMHP Law Firm

Ai-Leen LimCEO and Principal CounselAWA Asia (part of the Awapatent Group)

Rosie HawesPrincipal, Compliance, Forensics and Intelligence, Greater China and North AsiaControl Risks

Michael HickmanPrincipal, Compliance, Forensics and Intelligence, Greater China and North AsiaControl Risks

Ya Jing GuHead of Legal DepartmentBNP Paribas (China) Limited

Michelle GonPartnerMcDermott Will & Emery

Michael GuPartnerAnJie Law Firm

Feng SufangPartnerKing & Wood Mallesons

Tim GilkisonManaging DirectorIn-House Community

Matthew DurhamPartner, Employment, ShanghaiSimmons & Simmons

Richard BellPartner, ShanghaiClyde & Co

Patrick DransfieldPublishing Director Asian-mena Counsel and Co-DirectorIn-House Community

A special thanks on behalf of the In-House Community™ to all our speakers, which included:

EVENT REPORTS

THE BRIEFING




The latest senior legal appointments around Asia and the Middle East

MOVES

AUSTRALIA

Baker McKenzie has added Antony Rumboll as a partner in the cor-

porate markets team in Sydney, having joined the firm following his suc-

cess as an exceptional senior investment banking lawyer at UBS. During

his stay at UBS, the firm has been consistently ranked as one of Australia’s

leading investment banks across equity and debt capital markets, as well

as M&A. Rumboll has been involved in many of Australia’s most signifi-

cant corporate transactions, including the Qube takeover of Asciano, the

proposed Tatts/Tabcorp merger, the QR National IPO, Telstra 3 Share

Offer, 2010 Shell/Woodside block trade and recent IPOs, such as MYOB,

Healthscope and Link.

HONG KONG

Morgan Lewis has expanded its Hong Kong

presence with the addition of Alice Huang

as a partner in Hong Kong, focusing on fund

formation and asset management regulatory

and counseling advice. She counsels fund

sponsors based in the US and Asia on the for-

mation, structuring and on-going management

of private funds that are active in China or on a global basis. She also

represents institutional investors, including sovereign and pension funds,

on their investments in global private funds. Huang formerly worked as

a senior tax manager with Deloitte in Los Angeles and also served as

general counsel of an international private equity fund.

INDIA

Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas has added Nikhil Naredi as a part-

ner in the Mumbai office as part of the capital markets practice effective

October 11, 2017. He has over 13 years of experience, including over

five years at the Singapore office of an international law firm, in advising

clients on a wide variety of domestic and overseas securities offerings,

involving public offerings and private placements of equity, equity-linked

and debt securities. Naredi is an alumnus of the Columbia University,

New York and National Law School of India University, Bangalore. He

has worked with the Mumbai office of Amarchand & Mangaldas & Suresh

A Shroff & Co and Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas and the Singapore office

of Jones Day.

INDONESIA

Oentoeng Suria & Partners has added Prawidha Murti as a partner

in its dispute resolution practice in Jakarta. Murti joins from Makes &

Partners, in alliance with Singapore’s Wong Partnership. She has more

than 14 years’ litigation experience across multiple jurisdictions, handling

high-profile litigation and arbitration cases, from civil commercial dis-

putes to competition and anti-monopoly proceedings. Murti represents

clients in Indonesian courts, tribunals and arbitrations, and has advised

international and domestic companies in sectors, including oil and gas,

TMT and finance.

Alice Huang

JAPAN

Squire Patton Boggs has hired Rika Beppu

and Stephen Pak as corporate partners in

Tokyo. Beppu was previously head of corpo-

rate and M&A at Hogan Lovells in Tokyo and

also served as office managing partner and

head of the corporate department at Simmons

& Simmons in Tokyo. Dual-qualified in the UK

and Hong Kong, and a Registered Foreign

Lawyer in Japan since 2001, Beppu focuses

principally on advising Japanese multinational

companies on corporate and M&A transac-

tions. Pak was previously a senior foreign

counsel at Yulchon in Seoul, and also spent 12

years at Sidley Austin working from the firm’s

Los Angeles and Hong Kong offices. He is a

US-licensed lawyer with a broad corporate

practice, focusing on cross-border M&A, foreign investment transactions,

private equity and venture capital, as well as international dispute resolu-

tion. He has also advised on data security matters.

PAPUA NEW GUINEA

Corrs Chambers Westgarth has added Papua New Guinea (PNG)

resources sector specialist Vaughan Mills as a partner, to head the firm’s

establishment of its presence in Port Moresby, splitting his time between

the firm’s Port Moresby and Brisbane offices. Mills joined from Allens,

where he developed and led the PNG practice for nearly 20 years. He

has been advising on energy and resources projects in Australia and

PNG for more than 23 years, including while based in Port Moresby for

almost a decade. Mills has acted as PNG counsel advising ExxonMobil as

operator of the PNG LNG Project. Recently, he advised Oil Search in its

US$2.5 billion bid to acquire InterOil, which holds a 37 percent interest

in the PNG LNG Project. In Australia, he advised Shell Australia on its

20-year retail fuel Alliance with Coles Express.

SOUTH KOREA

Yulchon has added Nina Kim as a partner in its corporate and finance

practice. She joins from Kim & Chang, where she worked as a senior

foreign attorney in the corporate department from 2006 until recently.

Kim has extensive experience in a broad range of transactions and

projects, including cross-border M&As, corporate restructurings, joint

ventures and strategic alliances. Throughout her career, Kim has advised

clients in many high-profile transactions, including capital investments

made by foreign companies in Korea in various industries, such as in the

chemical, pharmaceutical, food and automobile sectors. She represents

corporate and institutional clients in transactions and projects, includ-

ing advising multinational companies and global private equity funds in

complex transactions with major Korean businesses and conglomerates,

such as Samsung, SK Chemicals, S-Oil and Hyundai and leading Korean

pharma companies. Prior to advising companies in Korea, she worked

Rika Beppu

Stephen Pak

THE BRIEFING



for 10 years in New York at international law firms, including Paul Hast-

ings.

SINGAPORE

Reed Smith has added projects and construction lawyer Bree Miechel

to the firm’s global energy and natural resources group in Singapore. She

joins from the Singapore office of Simmons & Simmons, where she led

the construction practice for the Southeast Asia region. Miechel, who has

more than 12 years of experience working in Asia and the Middle East,

advises sponsors, lenders, government authorities and contractors on

conventional and renewable power, energy efficiency, water and waste,

oil and gas, transport and social infrastructure projects locally, regionally

and worldwide. She recently advised a project sponsor on its procure-

ment strategy for an upstream liquids project in South East Asia and, on a

pro bono basis, leads a work stream for the Solar Energy Standardisation

Initiative spearheaded by the Terrawatt Initiative and the International

Renewable Energy Agency. Miechel was admitted as a solicitor in New

South Wales, Australia in 2005, before relocating to Hong Kong in 2006,

working with another international law firm in construction, finance and

M&A. She also practiced in Beijing and Abu Dhabi, prior to relocating to

Singapore in 2014. She is fluent in conversational Mandarin and Japanese.

Additionally, she serves as co-chair of the British Chamber of Commerce

Energy & Utility Business Group and as a Council Member of the Society

of Construction Law Singapore. A champion of diversity and women’s

career advancement, she is also an active member of Women in Energy

Asia.

Clifford Chance will add leading technology

partner Luke Grubb in its corporate practice

in Singapore later this year. His knowledge of

technology-related transactions includes more

than 20 years of experience advising on com-

mercial contracts, technology-driven merg-

ers, acquisitions and joint ventures, as well

as intellectual property, data privacy, cyber

security, fintech and payment systems. Grubb

joins from Latham & Watkins, where he heads the technology, media and

commercial practice in Asia, serves as a global chair of the information

technology–systems and solutions team and leads the fintech group in

Asia. He has a market leading practice in Asia, advising clients across all

industry sectors. He is admitted as a solicitor in England and Wales.

Luke Grubb

Confused as to where to start your search for external counsel across the Asia-mena region?

What’s more ...Just tell us what area, and where you are looking for advice, and based on feedback provided by our 20,000+ members across the Asia-mena region, as well as our personal knowledge of the market, we’ll be happy to give you a shortlist of firms or counsel to start your search with.

For more, contact Tim Gilkison [email protected]

You can start your search at:

www.inhousecommunity.com/find-a-lawyer/


http://www.inhousecommunity.com/


Asian-mena Counsel Deal of the Month

E-book company China Literature’s HK$8.3 billion (US$1.1bn) initial

public offering on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange exemplified how investor enthusiasm has gathered steam this year.

The retail tranche was more than 625 times oversubscribed, attracting over 400,000 applications and cash demand of more than HK$520 billion, making it the second most oversubscribed deal in Hong Kong’s history. Both the preferential offer-ing for existing Tencent shareholders and the international offering for institutional investors were also significantly oversub-scribed.

It was the largest tech IPO in Hong Kong since Alibaba.com in 2007 and the second-largest tech IPO in Asia this year after Korea’s Netmarble Games. Lucky investors who managed to get an alloca-tion were rewarded with a strong first-day performance. After pricing at HK$55,

shares doubled in price on their debut on November 8 and closed the day at HK$104.

All this excitement was driven by a combination of investors’ excitement about Tencent, China Literature’s parent and a top stock market performer, and the Chinese e-book sector. The com-pany says that it has 6.4 million authors, including both established names and self-published writers, and 9.6 million literary works on its platform, which is primarily accessed through its two best-known

China Literature

Other recent deals:Allen & Gledhill has also advised TPG Capital, Alliance Asia Holdings, Myanmar Winery & Distillery and Total Supply Chain on the US$742 million sale of 75 percent interest in the shares of Myanmar Supply Chain & Services and Myanmar Distill-ery and its related supply chain business. The group is Myanmar’s leading manufacturer, marketer and distributor of distilled bever-ages, including Grand Royal, the country’s leading whisky. The shares were sold to International Beverage Holdings (Singapore), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Thai Beverage. Partners Oh Hsiu Hau, Minn Naing Oo, Lim Chong Ying and Alexander Yap led the transaction, which is one of the largest M&A transactions in Myanmar to date. Weerawong, Chinnavat & Partners rep-resented Thai Bev. Senior partner Weerawong Chittmittra-pap and partner Sunyaluck Chaikajornwat led the transaction.

Fangda has represented New York-listed Qudian, a leading provider of online small consumer credit products in China, on its IPO of approximately 43.12 million American depositary shares at US$24 per ADS, for a total offering size of over US$1 billion, considering the underwriters have exercised their over-allotment option in full amount. The underwriters of the offering

are Morgan Stanley & Co International, Credit Suisse Securities (USA), Citigroup Global Markets, China International Capital Corporation Hong Kong Securities and UBS Securities. The trans-action is the biggest Chinese IPO in New York so far this year, surpassing the IPO of Best in New York on September 20, 2017, raising US$450 million at 45 million ADSs.

Shearman & Sterling is advising Shiseido, a leading global cos-metics company, on the approximately US$485 million sale of its wholly-owned subsidiary Zotos International and certain related assets to German-headquartered Henkel. Zotos is a fully inte-grated, global haircare company that manufactures and markets a full range of haircare, texture service and hair colour products. Henkel is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Germany-listed Henkel KGaA, which operates globally in the adhesive technologies, beauty care and laundry and home care business. Partner Ken-neth Lebrun (Tokyo-M&A), supported by partners Laurence Crouch (Menlo Park-tax), John Cannon (New York-compen-sation, governance & ERISA), Jordan Altman (New York-IP) and Jessica Delbaum (New York-antitrust), led the transaction, which is subject to customary conditions, including the receipt of necessary regulatory approvals.

apps, QQ Reading and Qudian.The deal also highlights a trend

towards improving intellectual property protections in the Chinese market. China Literature’s business is, in effect, selling subscriptions to copyrighted works that until relatively recently would have had little protection in China — and therefore little value. The demand for its IPO shows how significantly this has changed during the past decade.

After the IPO, Tencent, through its subsidiaries, owns 62% of the shares in China Literature and private equity firm Carlyle Group has a 12% stake.

Clifford Chance advised the joint sponsors and underwriters, including Morgan Stanley, Bank of America Merrill Lynch and Credit Suisse. The deal was co-led by Clifford Chance partners Amy Lo, Tim Wang and Fang Liu.

Skadden advised China Literature. The team is led by partners Julie Gao and Christopher Betts in Hong Kong and Haiping Li in Shanghai.

“The deal also highlightsa trend towards

improving intellectual property protections in

the Chinese market”

DEAL OF THE MONTH

THE BRIEFING



Asset searches in the digital age

[email protected]

Companies and individuals may wish

to seek to identify the assets of

third parties and estimate their

value for various reasons. They may need

this information to fully evaluate an

investment target or joint venture partner,

or they may need it as part of an effort to

recover funds (or assess the likelihood

thereof) from a counterparty in connection

with an actual or anticipated judgment or

arbitration award. Often companies

conduct an asset search before proceeding

on a lengthy and potentially expensive

arbitration or litigation.

In the past 24 months in the Asia-

Pacific region, many banks have also been

conducting asset searches related to non-

performing loans (NPLs), which have been

climbing in the face of slow economic

growth. As defaults rise, several banks have

been aggressive in trying to recover assets

from founder entrepreneurs of borrower

companies. In India alone, NPLs stood at

nearly US$180 billion as of the end of March

2017, many of which have been classified

as wilful, which means the companies and/

or their promoters have defaulted but are

believed to have the ability to repay. The

softening economic environment has also

led to a rise in shareholder disputes in the

region, where often one party is accused of

illegally misappropriating and diverting

company funds. In this case, one party may

want to identify the assets of another

party.

The globalisation of business combined

with the ever-expanding world of offshore

finance enables business owners or

company management to set up complex

corporate structures to hide the true

ownership of their assets. Lawyers and

investigators often need to use

sophisticated forensic investigative

techniques to help creditors (banks,

corporates and other financial institutions)

locate unidentified assets not only in the

local market, but also overseas, where

assets may be hidden or where markets are

more regulated and creditors may have a

better chance of enforcing an arbitration

award or seizing assets.

Asset searches are challenging and the

methodology that investigators and lawyers

can use depends on the jurisdictions where

the assets are being searched, the quality

and content of available public records in

that jurisdiction, the nature of the entity

whose assets are being traced, the value of

assets and various other factors. Add to this

complexity the fact that an entity’s assets,

their location and the type of assets you

are after, may all be unknown at the

beginning of an investigation.

Traditionally, investigators have used a

phased approach that relied heavily on the

collection of national and international

public records to identify assets and to

gather information that provides clues to

where and what type of assets may be

found. These clues can often be found in

corporate records such as in the publicly

available charge documents filed with

banks. These records may identify

subsidiaries in foreign locations and where

assets can be located. However, public

records in many countries in the region are

of poor quality, non-transparent and are

often not up to date. Hence, investigators

often have to develop a network of primary

sources, often across the globe, that can

provide unbiased, actionable intelligence

on potential assets. The information

gathered in this process can help companies

better understand the financial health of

the entities or individuals whose assets they

are searching, it may help unravel the

corporate structures that potentially hide

the true ownership of assets, provide leads

to be pursued and prioritised, identify

sources that can be tapped for further

inquiry and possibly identify low hanging

fruit in terms of assets that can be used in

negotiation or claim as part of the legal

action.

In our experience, this is sometimes not

sufficient as many companies and

individuals park funds in non-transparent

jurisdictions where financial assets cannot

be assessed and accessed. However,

investigators can use publicly available

social media, and the technology that is

available to parse through such data

generated by social media, to their

advantage. There are several specialised

tools now available that can track the

public social media profile of individuals.

This can help companies determine where a

certain individual holidays, whether they

have a luxury yacht or have recently bought

expensive art or vehicles that they (or a

friend or relative) cannot resist publicly

sharing on social media. This information

can provide useful leads for an investigator.

Even the most secretive borrower may have

a relative or friend who displays their life

publicly on social media. The regulation in

the Asia-Pacific region relating to the mining

of publicly available social media data is

still nebulous but is likely to evolve fast.

The various methods described above

for the collection of information and

evidence related to assets, combined with

criminal and civil recovery remedies across

international jurisdictions, provide valuable

tools to companies and their legal advisers

in a dispute.

Reshmi KhuranaManaging Director and Head, South Asia

Social media and other technology are changing the way asset searches are conducted in a dispute

INVESTIGATIVE INTELLIGENCE


http://www.kroll.com


Opportunities of the Month …

Be it a case of wanting to spice things up or break the pattern, every now and then, it's nice to know there's something else. Whether you do so casually or stringently, take a look below to see what the legal sector can offer you.

Regional Legal6-10 yrs PQE, Hong Kong

A global business with its HQ in Hong Kong seeks additional senior lawyers to support its various business units. Work involves advising the international business on general commercial work covering contracts, IP, HR issues. Lawyers from private practice as well as in-house will be considered. [Ref: IHC 15953]

Contact: Claire ParkTel: (852) 2920 9134

Email: [email protected]

APAC Senior Counsel – Engineering15+ yrs PQE, Singapore

A senior counsel is sought to support various business lines independently for the APAC region. You will be working closely with Asia Pacific business leaders, and their management teams. The scope of work includes dealing with contracts, bid for tenders, managing external counsel when required, and dealing with compliance issues such as anti-bribery and corruption laws.The ideal candidate should have prior work experience in sectors such as healthcare and engineering. [Ref: JGB - IS 1745]

Contact: Benedict JosephTel: (65) 6818 9707


Associate General Counsel – Retail10+ yrs PQE, Hong Kong

A global retail conglomerate is seeking an associate general counsel to join its legal team in Hong Kong. The ideal person will have at least 10 years of post-qualification experience with exposure to franchising matters and M&A experience will be an advantage. Excellent opportunity to join a growing team of a well-established brand. Chinese language skills are preferred but not essential. [Ref: PBP6766]

Contact: Karishma KhemaneyTel: (852) 2537 0895


ECM Lawyer – Investment Banking4+ yrs PQE, Hong Kong

An experienced ECM/IPO lawyer is sought by a renowned international investment bank to advise on their equity markets team. The responsibilities of the successful candidate will include providing legal advice on equity capital market transactions including IPOs, placements and block trades.Applicants should have at least four years’ PQE at another financial institution or international law firm. The prospective joiner will demonstrate the required technical and analytical skills in dealing with ECM transactions. Chinese language skill (written and spoken) is required. [Ref: 10553]

Contact: Carmen MokTel: (852) 2951 2117


Senior Legal Counsel (Regional)8+ yrs PQE, Singapore

A listed global MNC with substantial APAC presence has created this new role to support business growth in the SE Asia markets.Reporting to the APAC general counsel based in Singapore, you will lead a legal manager to handle a broad array of general corporate matters such as drafting and review of commercial, vendors, manufacturing contracts, compliance, HR /union matters, litigation and M&A. The M&A pipeline for the mid-term is healthy and hence there may be slightly more focus in this area of work for the next 12-18 months.Ideally, you are with at least eight years’ PQE (SG or HK qualified), with solid in-house experience. Candidates with experience supporting manufacturing entities, who trained in the corporate teams within private practice are preferred but not a must. Travelling of 25% to be expected. [Ref: R/MK/SLC(R)]

Contact: Michelle KohTel: (65) 6407 1202


Compliance Specialist, Asia – IT5+ yrs PQE, Singapore

An MNC in the IT industry is looking to hire a mid-level lawyer to join its team in Singapore. Responsibilities entail advising various business units on IT, IP commercial, compliance and litigation matters in the region. Candidates called to the Singapore or Malaysian Bar with strong private practice background and prior experience from the IT industry, strongly preferred. Strong commercial acumen, excellent interpersonal and communication skills highly preferred. The role offers a stable, supportive environment and a collegiate team. Fluency in Mandarin an advantage as the candidate will be required to liaise with business units and Chinese speaking counterparts. Minimal travel anticipated. [Ref: A43396]

Contact: Savera BhatnagarTel: (65) 6214 3310


Employment Counsel – IT8+ yrs PQE, China

A world-renowned IT group is hiring an employment counsel with an international background to join its China legal team. You will primarily be responsible for providing legal and regulatory compliance support on all labour and personnel issues including but not limited to internal policies drafting, overseas employee litigation and daily employment consultation. You must have at least three years’ PQE as an employment law and litigation lawyer in a MNC. A law degree or above plus a license to practice law in US/Hong Kong/Singapore or Europe are required. Candidates who have a global perspective and overseas work experience are best suited for the role. Excellent English drafting skills are mandatory as well as native-level English and fluent Mandarin. [Ref: 14235/AC]

Contact: Sally XieTel: (852) 2520 1168










Anti-Trust&

Competition

Asia’s evolving competition landscapeBy Nick Ferguson,In-House Community

Anti-monopoly enforcement in China’s healthcare industryBy Michael Gu and Sihui Sun,AnJie Law Firm

Towards robust yet balanced competition in the PhilippinesBy Francisco Lim and Eric Recalde, ACCRALAW

26 28 32 25 Volume 15 Issue 3, 2017


ANTI-TRUST & COMPETITION

After a period of rapid adoption of competition laws in Asia, only Bhutan and North Korea are compliance safe spaces, write Nick Ferguson.

Doing business in Asia is getting increasingly complicated as jurisdictions have embraced competition laws and started active enforcement. This is good

news for external advisers, but a potential compliance headache for in-house teams.

Even Hong Kong, which once prided itself as a bastion of free-market principles and laissez-faire regulation, has entered the enforcement phase of its new competition regime, with two proceedings launched so far this year — one against five technology companies accused of bid-rigging and another against 10 construction and engineering companies accused of price-fixing.

Enforcement activity is also on the rise in China, Japan and Korea. Indeed, China has quickly established itself as one of the most active jurisdictions in the world for competition law, with the commerce ministry handling 353 merger cases in 2016, which is even more than the EU. In Korea, the Fair Trade Commission imposed total fines of US$760 million in 2016 — almost double that of the US — and this year it imposed a US$900 million fine on Qualcomm.

“With competition regimes emerging and strengthening in Asia, companies doing business here will need to invest more resources to ensure

compliance with the region’s diverse laws and enforcement practices,” according to Kaori Yamada, partner and co-head of Freshfields’ Asia antitrust, competition and trade practice. “Appropriate training, policies, procedures and internal reporting mechanisms can all mitigate the risk of infringement, but in-house legal teams need to keep these under constant review to keep pace with the region’s rapidly evolving landscape.”

Wherever companies do business in Asia today they are typically butting up against a competition environment that is either immature or undergoing significant amendments, and often both. China, Indonesia, Japan, Mongolia, Thailand and Vietnam are all either considering or actively overhauling their regimes, while countries such as Brunei, Laos, Myanmar and the Philippines all have relatively young competition laws that companies with global operations need to be aware of. And with Cambodia’s draft law close to being finalised, that leaves Bhutan and North Korea as the only jurisdictions in the region without some form of competition law.

Compared to the unified competition authorities in Europe and the US, the situation in Asia can be confusing and time-consuming.

Asia’s evolving competition

landscape

“Undeniably, the centre of gravity of global competition law enforcement

has shifted closer to Asia” Alastair Mordaunt, Freshfields


Asia’s evolving competition landscape


By Nick Ferguson, In-House Community

Qualcomm’s US$39 billion acquisition of NXP Semiconductor, for example, requires notification to merger control authorities in China, Japan, Korea, the Philippines and Taiwan.

Besides merger control, a particular focus for authorities in Asia is cartels. Almost every country in the region has a history of large groups dominating certain sectors of the economy, from the chaebol in Korea and the keiretsu in Japan, to the 40 or 50 families that control the economies of Hong Kong and South-East Asia. While these dynamics are changing, bid-rigging for government contracts remains a pervasive problem that costs the region billions of dollars a year, especially in developing economies where public procurement is typically higher as a share of GDP than in rich countries.

“This is a type of cartel that is a priority for many jurisdictions in Asia as it directly affects the public purse by making products more costly for the government and ultimately the taxpayers,” said Ruben Maximiano, a competition specialist at the OECD.

Hong Kong’s first bid-rigging case is scheduled to be heard by the Competition Tribunal in June 2018, while Korea has been particularly active in pursuing such cases recently, having imposed fines of W37.8 billion (US$34m) on four conveyor belt companies and penalised six concrete associations for collusion. Bid-rigging was also found in the power sector, with Korea Hydro and Nuclear Power both fined for anti-competitive practices.

Leniency programmes have proven surprisingly effective at obtaining evidence against cartels, particularly in Japan and Korea, but also in China, India, Singapore and Taiwan, according to Freshfields.

As competition authorities become more sophisticated and tackle more complex cases, enforcement powers have been increasing — and so has the confidence of the agencies charged with tackling anti-competitive behaviours and merger review, including thorny intellectual property issues in the digital economy, complex theories of harm and even issues arising from foreign-to-foreign M&A.

While there is some cause for concern given the rising protectionism seen around the world, specialists say they have yet not seen competition authorities in Asia using their powers to favour domestic players over foreign counterparts — and, in fact, foreign investment rules are actually being relaxed in several countries, such as China and Vietnam.

One thing is for sure — as the competition

landscape in Asia continues to evolve, in-house legal teams will need to invest more resources into compliance.

“Undeniably, the centre of gravity of global competition law enforcement has shifted closer to Asia,” said Alastair Mordaunt, partner and co-head of Freshfields’ Asian antitrust, competition and trade practice. “While there are still huge variations across the region in terms of economic and political development, we are seeing Asian markets take a much more vigorous and sophisticated approach to competition law enforcement, and companies should take notice.”

Asian antitrust milestones2017• New law comes into effect in Thailand• Enforcement begins in the Philippines• Merger control thresholds amended in India• Korea Fair Trade Commission fines

Qualcomm approximately US$900m• Malaysia Competition Commission issues

record fines in insurance sector• New sanctions come into effect in Mongolia• Hong Kong Competition Commission brings

its first two cartel cases before the Competition Tribunal

2018• New competition law expected to be

enacted in Vietnam• Draft text of changes to fining procedures

expected to be introduced in Japan• Amendments to competition laws in

Indonesia and Mongolia to be considered• Various rules on antitrust investigations and

abuse of intellectual property rights to be considered in China

2019• Expected establishment of Asean

Competition Enforcers’ Network• Philippine Competition Commission

expected to complete its investigation into the cement industry

2020• New Asean Regional Guidelines for

Competition Policy to be issued• Study on recommended procedures for

joint investigations and decisions among Asean countries on cross-border cases to be completed

Source: Freshfields



Companies involved in the manufacture and sale of active pharmaceutical ingredients are in the spotlight as Chinese authorities prepare an anti-monopoly windstorm.

The healthcare industry has gradually become one of the key focal points of the anti-monopoly law enforcement in China. As of the end of July 2017, the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) and the

State Administration for Industry and Commerce (SAIC) have concluded and published nine anti-monopoly penalty cases, targeting 16 healthcare enterprises with a total fine of about Rmb134 million since the implementation of the Anti-Monopoly

Law in 2008. We foresee the two law enforcement authorities potentially launching a more forceful anti-monopoly windstorm

in the healthcare industry in the future and possibly investigating and penalising in succession certain well-

known pharmaceutical and medical device enterprises. Through the investigation and handling of a series of cases, the NDRC and SAIC have accumulated a significant amount of experience in the healthcare industry sector. Healthcare enterprises are likely to face a more serious anti-monopoly compliance challenge.

OverviewUp to July 2017, the SAIC has concluded three cases

with a total fine of Rmb828,900; and the NDRC has concluded six cases with a total fine of Rmb 133,000,000. Please see the table below for details.

By Michael Gu and Sihui Sun, AnJie Law Firm

Michael Gu

Anti-monopoly enforcement

in China’s healthcare industry


Anti-monopoly enforcement in China’s healthcare industry



Sihui Sun

Significant features of concluded casesThe anti-monopoly cases that have been investigated and handled in the healthcare industry manifest the following defining features:(1) the enterprise entities that have

been subjected to penalties are diverse, including private enterprises, Sino-foreign equity joint ventures, wholly foreign-owned enterprises and state-owned enterprises;

(2) the types of anti-monopoly acts vary widely, with the law enforcement authorities penalising not only the abuse of dominant market position but also the violations of reaching and implementing of horizontal or vertical monopoly agreements;

(3) the cases extend over a broad area, covering both the upstream and downstream of the industry chain, with the recipients of penalties including active ingredient

producers, pharmaceutical producers and distributors, medical device producers, etc.

Types of investigated anti-monopoly behavioursThe cases that have been investigated and handled to date not only cover commonly seen anti- monopoly behaviours, but also include relatively obscure or complex ones. As of the end of July 2017, the SAIC had investigated and handled a total of three cases in the healthcare industry, all of which included abuse of dominant market position in certain active ingredient markets in China; and the NDRC and provincial level pricing authorities had investigated and handled a total of six cases, including two cases of abuse of dominant market position, two horizontal monopoly agreement cases and two vertical monopoly agreement cases. Please see the form below for details.

NDRC

SAIC

Authority Date CaseNo. Illegal gains confiscated (Rmb)

Jan 11 2017Wuhan Xinxing Jingying Medical Monopoly Case3. 1,836,900 372,321

Nov 15 2011Promethazine APIs Monopoly case (Abuse of dominant market position — unfairly high prices)

4. 429,600 6,600,000

Jan 15 2016Allopurinol Drug Cartel Case (Cartel — price fixing; market allocation; and bid-rigging)

5. — 3,995,500

Jul 22 2016Estazolam Drugs Cartel Case (Cartel — joint boycott; price-fixing)6. — 2,603,823

Dec 5 2016 Medtronic RPM case7. — 118,520,000

Dec 29 2016 Smith & Nephew RPM case8. — 742,148

Jul 28 2017

Zhejiang Second Pharma and Tianjin Handewei Pharmaceutical Monopoly case (Abuse of dominant market position — unfairly high prices and refusal-to-deal)

9. — 443,900

Oct 28 2015Chongqing Qingyang Pharmaceutical Monopoly case (Abuse of dominant market position — refusal-to-deal)

1. — 439,308

Nov 24 2016Chongqing Southwest No.2 Pharmaceutical Factory Monopoly case (Abuse of dominant market position – refusal-to-deal)

2. 482,884 17,240

Fine (Rmb)



It is worth noting that the cases of abuse of dominant market position to refuse to deal involving Chongqing Qingyang Pharmaceutical and Chongqing Southwest No. 2 Pharmaceutical Factory investigated and handled by the SAIC were the first and second refusal to deal cases in China. Most recently, the NDRC concluded the third refusal to deal case, Zhejiang Second Pharma and Tianjin Handewei Pharmaceutical Monopoly case. The above three cases constitute all refusal to deal cases that have been investigated and penalised by competition law enforcement agencies in China since the implementation of the Anti-Monopoly Law. Furthermore, the Estazolam drug cartel case investigated and handled by the NDRC was the first concerted practice case since the implementation of the Anti-Monopoly Law.

Concerted practice in horizontal monopoly agreementsIn the Estazolam drug cartel case, three

enterprises held secret meetings, reaching a tacit understanding on a collective increase in the price of Estazolam tablets. Although Changzhou Siyao Pharmaceutical did not actively participate in the conspiracy, it did not object to the collusion and later followed the other two companies’ lead. NDRC determined that it engaged in a concerted practice. Article 6 of the Provision on Anti-price Monopoly formulated by the NDRC and Article 3 of the Provisions for Administrative Authorities for Industry and Commerce on Prohibiting the Conclusion of Monopoly Agreements formulated by the SAIC set forth specific provisions on the determination of concerted practice. Despite the fact that there are nuanced differences between the two articles, both consider the following major factors when analysing whether concerted practice has occurred: namely uniformity, the exchange of information, reasonable explanations, the market structure and market changes. Please see the table below for details.

0

1

2

3

4

5

SAIC

NDRC

Vertical agreements

Horizontalagreements

Abuse of dominantmarket position

Uniformity

Information exchange

Reasonable explanation

Other factors

Did the companies commit acts uniformly?

Did the companies communicate their intentions or exchange information?

Can the companies give a reasonable explanation for their concerted practice?

Market structure, competition, market changes and industry situation

SAIC

—

Were the companies’ price adjustment activities consistent?

Did the companies communicate their intentions?

Market structure and market changes

NDRC


Anti-monopoly enforcement in China’s healthcare industry



Continued law enforcement in RPMVertical price monopoly has always been one of the priorities of the NDRC’s anti-monopoly law enforcement, particularly so in the healthcare industry. We envision that this trend will continue. It is worth noting that in the Medtronic resale price maintenance case, the NDRC, in its penalty decision, not only clarified the illegality of the fixed resale price of Medtronic (Shanghai) Management and its setting of a minimum resale price, but also touched upon such acts taken by it as limiting the sales territory of distributors, prohibiting distributors from selling products of competing brands, etc. The NDRC held that ―these restrictive measures were implemented together with the vertical pricing measures, further strengthening the anticompetitive effect of maintaining the resale prices and setting minimum resale prices. This case, while indicating that the anti-monopoly law enforcement authorities plan to continue their strict enforcement in the vertical pricing monopolies, also sees them beginning to pay attention to other non-pricing vertical restrictive measures. Accordingly, it is necessary for relevant enterprises to act prudently with respect to vertical restrictive measures, regardless of whether they involve pricing.

APIs in the spotlightThe enterprises engaged in the manufacture and sale of active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) are in the spotlight of antitrust law enforcement. Among the nine cases concluded by the SAIC and NDRC, six cases are in relation to the APIs. Furthermore, all the concluded cases of abuse of dominant market position are concerned with APIs. The following reasons may explain APIs enterprises’ position on the front line and their dominant position in the market: (1) very few enterprises actually compete in certain API markets; (2) API manufacturers provide the active ingredients of drugs with a strong ability to control the market and the downstream pharmaceuticals have no choice but to submit to and rely on the API manufacturers; and (3) China has a very strict certification system for supervision on the production of APIs and it is difficult to enter API markets.

On August 14, 2017, the NDRC released its draft of Price Conduct Guidelines on Operators of Drugs prone to Shortages and APIs (Draft Guidelines) to solicit public feedback. The Draft Guidelines cover most monopolistic behaviours of APIs manufacturers, including monopolistic agreements and abuse of dominant market position. The Draft Guidelines are aimed at curbing illegal price increases and malicious market controls, ensuring fair competition and price order in the relevant areas, protecting consumer

welfare and contributing to medical reform. According to the NDRC, the submission of feedback will be accepted until September 13, 2017.

How to respond?The authors would recommend that healthcare enterprises closely watch development trends and features of anti-monopoly investigations in China. Enterprises can strengthen their anti-monopoly compliance in the following ways:(1) promptly conducting a risk screening and, if

necessary, engaging a professional lawyer to assist in conducting an internal anti-monopoly audit;

(2) providing anti-monopoly compliance training to senior officers and employees (particularly sales departments) and arranging for senior officers and employees to participate in drills for responding to ‘dawn raid’ in anti-monopoly investigations;

(3) examining the company’s product pricing policy, discount or rebate system, sales policies, distributor contracts, etc from the perspective of the anti-monopoly law;

(4) being vigilant for horizontal information exchanges, including concerted practice and prudently handling sensitive information exchanges;

(5) assessing one’s own market share, and if the same could constitute a dominant market position or relatively strong advantageous position, conducting a check of the agreements executed with upstream and downstream enterprises and, conducting an anti-monopoly risk assessment regarding irregular terminations of dealing, refusals to deal, exclusive arrangements, other restrictive measures or commercial terms suspected of being unreasonable; and

(6) if a suspected violation of the law is discovered, seeking legal opinion as soon as possible and promptly formulating a rectification or response plan.

Michael Gu

[email protected]

(86 10) 8567 5959




The Philippine Competition Commission is taking strides towards a competition law regime that is responsive to business while still promoting competition

The state of Philippine competition regulation has been slowly taking shape barely over two years after the passage of the Philippine Competition

Act (RA 10667). Since the effectivity of the law in August 2015, the Philippine Competition Commission (PCC) has taken stride towards its full implementation. ACCRALaw for its part has actively participated in developing a competition law regime that is responsive to business and at the same time promoting competition, as envisaged in the law.

Just like the competition regulation of other jurisdictions, the Philippines regulates and/or penalises whatever form of anti-competitive acts of persons and entities that have effect on Philippine competition, be that in the form of agreements, abuse of dominant position or mergers and acquisitions (M&As).

Immediately following its formation in February 2016, the PCC issued transitory circulars to provide guidelines on how to treat

M&As covered by the mandatory notification for merger control review under the law. These circulars were meant to address uncertainties in the M&As pending the issuance of the law’s implementing rules and regulations (IRR). Four months later, the PCC finally issued the IRR. Essentially, the IRR spelled out the notification thresholds and the procedure for the two-phase merger control review. To supplement the IRR, the PCC issued Merger Review Guidelines on substantive merger analysis, and a few clarificatory notes. Currently, it is deliberating on a Merger Procedure that will set in a more detailed fashion the rules for the two-phase merger control review, taking into account its experiences and issues encountered for the past year. Through its interactions, ACCRA has actively assisted PCC in crafting such procedure in a manner that will avoid delay in the conclusion of M&A transactions and at the same time permit the PCC to adequately review them.

Towards robust yet

By Francisco Lim and Eric Recalde, ACCRALAW

balanced competitionin the Philippines


Towards robust yet balanced competition in the Philippines



It will be noted the IRR did not provide details or guidelines on when an act may constitute as anti-competitive agreement or abuse of dominant position. Based on prior consultations, the PCC intimated it will not provide those details or guidelines and will rather evaluate the act considering the broad parameters set in the law (and reiterated in the IRR) and, presumably, the interpretations of other jurisdictions. Nevertheless, the PCC has recently issued its Rules of Procedure in the investigation and hearing of purported anti-competitive agreements and conduct of persons and entities, their remedies and sanctions that may be imposed on them.

In light of the mandate of the law to assist the National Economic Development Authority (NEDA) in preparing and formulating a national competition policy, the PCC has started consultations with various sectors. Francis Lim, a senior partner of ACCRA, has assisted the PCC in this endeavour. In particular, we pointed out the various provisions of the constitution, laws and various government regulations that serve as roadblocks to free competition and need to be revisited and, if necessary, modified or recalled. One of these is the regulations of the Philippine Contractors’ Accreditation Board limiting the participation of foreign contractors in construction activities in the Philippines. The PCC, noting that such regulations have no explicit legal basis, has intervened in a pending case before the Supreme Court and requested for the declaration of invalidity of the said regulations.

Shortly after the issuance of the IRR, we published a book entitled The Philippine Competition Act: Salient Points and Emerging Issues. We anticipated that the law, at its infancy stage, will give rise to several issues, which we pointed out in our book and gladly shared with PCC. The officals will likely guard the PCC’s prerogatives, specifically the robustness of its authority to interpret the law, conduct investigations and review M&As. On the other hand, as private practitioners, we in ACCRA endeavour to protect our clients based on our understanding of the law and if necessary to take an advocate’s position relative to a point of law as applied to a particular set of circumstances. Mutual respect and openness are essential in this case.

For example, in relation to the timing when the merger notification should be made, the law does not specifically provide guidance. It only forbids parties to a notifiable transaction “from consummating their agreement until 30 days after providing notification to the Commission in the form and containing the information specified in the regulations issued by the Commission”. In the IRR, the PCC requires the parties “to notify the Commission before the execution of the definitive agreements relating to the transaction”. It has later explained by way of a Clarificatory Note that definitive agreements may refer to “a share purchase agreement, asset purchase agreement, joint venture agreement or other similar agreement”, and parties may notify on the basis of a binding preliminary agreement,

Francisco Lim

The officals will likely guard the PCC’s prerogatives, specifically the robustness of its authority to interpret the law, conduct investigations and review M&As. On the other hand, as private practitioners, we endeavour to protect our clients based on our understanding of the law and if necessary to take an advocate’s position relative to a point of law as applied to a particular set of circumstances. Mutual respect and openness are essential in this case.



such as “a memorandum of agreement, term sheet or letter of intent”. This naturally caused some difficulty for some especially those who were involved in a global deal, wherein the global definitive agreement was signed before filing with the prescribed notification for each jurisdiction. While there were certain jurisdictions that recognised notification pre-execution of definitive agreement, parties in those cases were only given the option to make such notification to avoid delay in the closing of the transaction. They were not mandated to immediately make such notification. If they wish, they can do so post-execution of the definitive agreement but before consummation of the underlying transaction. ACCRA pointed this out in previous interaction with PCC and formally presented by way of comment on the draft Merger Procedure, which as mentioned was still under consideration by the PCC. We understand that the PCC based on its exposure draft would soon permit the parties to file notification within a certain period following the execution of the definitive agreement. The parties’ failure to notify within the prescribed period following execution of the definitive agreement will merit sanctions but not the same sanction should they proceed and consummate the agreement without the PCC approval. It will be the latter scenario when the heftier 1-5 percent penalty (based on the value of the transaction) prescribed by law will apply. These demonstrate the openness of the PCC to suggestions and resolved to adopt a

business-friendly procedure in the discharge of its mandate to review M&A transactions.

There are still a lot of things to be done. The PCC has yet to issue (together with relevant sector regulators) needful rules and regulations to promote competition, protect consumers and regulate activities of entities falling under their respective jurisdiction. It has not yet promulgated other criteria that may be applied to a sector or across some or all sectors that will likewise trigger merger notification, or has yet to stipulate an increased transaction value threshold. For some, the existing notification threshold of P1 billion is too low, in light of the increased values of Philippine transactions. It has not also fully demonstrated how it would protect confidential business information gathered during its investigation. Its ability to protect such information is a major concern for some of the parties in an M&A transaction that makes them hesitant providing them in the course of investigation. We understand that the PCC is in the process of providing a secured record keeping system to allay this concern of parties under investigation.

In relation to its mandate to investigate anti-competitive acts, the PCC is currently evaluating the actions of certain industry players. Apparently, these entities failed to rectify their practices within the two-year transition period to align with the law. This ended in August this year. This is the reason why the PCC recently issued its Rules of

There are still a lot of things to be done. The PCC has yet to issue (together with relevant sector regulators) needful rules and regulations to promote competition, protect consumers and regulate activities of entities falling under their respective jurisdiction.

Eric Recalde


Towards robust yet balanced competition in the Philippines



Procedure, as mentioned earlier, to provide guidance to parties under investigation of their rights and remedies. The same rules likewise spell out the specific administrative fines. Specifically, the basic fine for an anti-competitive act is up to 30 percent of the relevant turnover, unless the entity does not compete in the relevant market in which case the rate is reduced to 20 percent. This basic fine may be adjusted to arrive at the final fine, depending on the existence of aggravating or mitigating factors cited in the rules. The final fine will be tripled if the violation involves the trade or movement of basic necessities and prime commodities. In the interest of fairness and equity, the rules explicitly recognise the authority to depart from the above-described methodology of setting the fine.

It is also likely that the PCC will soon revisit the 50 percent market share threshold giving rise to a presumption of market dominance in evaluating conduct of entities under investigation. In such a case, the PCC is mandated to “consider the structure of the relevant market, degree of integration, access to end-users, technology and financial resources, and other factors affecting the control of a market”. However, it is still not settled whether the PCC can lower or is only permitted to increase the 50 percent threshold. The congressional deliberations are not very helpful on this issue. Active discussion on PCC’s authority to increase the threshold does not necessarily imply the absence of its authority to lower such threshold. This is crucial since a lower threshold raises the presumption of market dominance, and opens itself to investigation whether its actions may be regarded as abuse of such dominance as mentioned in the law. This imposes a burden on the concerned entity to dispute such

It is still not settled whether the PCC can lower or is only permitted to increase the 50 percent threshold. The congressional deliberations are not very helpful on this issue. Active discussion on PCC’s authority to increase the threshold does not necessarily imply the absence of its authority to lower such threshold.

presumption taking into account the factors mentioned in the law. A related issue is whether the list of acts deemed to be in abuse of dominant position cited in the law is exclusive or merely illustrative. A plain reading of the law suggests it is. However, the IRR shows the list is only illustrative, and does not rule out other actions that may be considered in conflict with law. Congressional deliberations appear to support the position taken in the IRR.

In such a short period of time, the PCC has done a lot. At the rate it is going, it is apparent the PCC will soon take the above measures in order to fully implement the law. It is the job of the regulated persons and entities to do their share by adjusting their actions to align with the law. They should likewise bring to the attention of PCC, with assistance of advisers like ACCRA, the actions and interpretations of PCC that they consider to be excessive or too cumbersome to business.

[email protected]

[email protected]

www.accralaw.com




DRAFTThe thing about …

Jeanette Ch an


ASIAN-MENA COUNSEL Q&A



DRAFT

practical legal solutions to our clients. Quality is paramount, and we believe that differentiates us from other firms; that commitment has also helped create business opportunities for our firm in this region for over 30 years. We remain very focused on our areas of expertise, and we also strive to further enhance our skills and our knowledge. In addition, we are passionate about our work, and we like to think this comes across in our interactions with clients and peers.Paul, Weiss’s largest office is in New York, but our overseas offices extend the firm’s capabilities. In China, we are strategically focused on niche practices in the areas of M&A, private equity and technology, media and telecommunications, where we have been consistently ranked in the top tier by numerous publications. Last year, we added two top-tier lateral hires in Hong Kong and China, Betty Yap and Judie Ng Shortell, who are renowned for M&A and private equity transactions, respectively. This approach aligns with our global strategy to carefully grow our corporate and M&A practice.

AMC: I note that you spent some time as In-House at Cable & Wireless: has that experience enabled you to engage with in-house clients more effectively?Chan: It certainly was a great experience and gave me another perspective on how to work with in-house lawyers more efficiently. Having been on ‘the other side’ allows me to manage the expectations of in-house lawyers much more effectively, and you also learn where and how outside counsel can add the most value. There is a level of empathy involved because you learn to understand the pressures and limitations that in-house lawyers face — whether it be from their senior management or their law firms.

Jeanette Ch an ASIAN-MENA COUNSEL: Jeanette, as part of

your legal training, you were an associate mentored by Jerry Cohen — how have you seen the China legal market evolve over your career? How does the in-house counsel community in China during the early 90s compare to the Chinese in-house community today?Jeanette Chan: When Paul, Weiss first opened in Asia in the 1980s, there were less than a handful of international law firms in the region, and only a couple that focused on the China market. Tribute should definitely be paid to Jerry Cohen, a senior counsel, who helped to establish the firm’s China practice at that time; he had an amazing vision and saw China as a huge market with great potential for growth. The landscape of the legal market has changed considerably over the last three decades, with an influx of international law firms as well as the rapid development of local law firms. Today, Asia has the largest concentration of international law firms, many of which have China practices that focuses purely on China-related work. Similarly, the in-house community in China has adapted to the changing times where many of the in-house lawyers receive their education overseas and are qualified to practice law in Hong Kong, the US and/or the UK. Their education, background, language skills and experience is highly sought after in China.

AMC: What do you wish an in-house counsel to have ‘front of mind’ when she thinks about Paul, Weiss? Has the firm retained a consistent strategy for Asia in general and China in particular over the time you have been with the firm?Chan: I am confident that when in-house counsel think of Paul, Weiss, they think of quality, practicality and passion. We have consistently delivered excellent service and

Recently, Asian-mena Counsel’s Patrick Dransfield photographed

Jeanette Chan, managing partner of the China practice and head of the

Asia communications and technology practice at Paul, Weiss, and asked

her a series of questions on behalf of the In-House Community.

The thing about … Jeanette Chan



AMC: Clients, and the availability of technology, are challenging leading law firms to be on top of technological advances to best provide value. How does Paul, Weiss effectively use technologically-advanced solutions in its services to clients?Chan: Paul, Weiss is a leader when it comes to technology. We give our lawyers the option to bring their own devices and our IT department provides all technical support necessary so that our lawyers’ ability to provide prompt and efficient legal support is not limited by technology. In addition to providing technologically advanced solutions, Paul, Weiss is also at the forefront of technology-related transactions. Our ability to deliver sound counsel to our clients is reflected in the range of projects we handle, from traditional regulatory and transactional work in telecommunications and media to representations involving advanced technologies, convergence and the Internet. In China, we have provided innovative solutions in the telecommunications, IT and media markets since 1994, when China first opened to foreign companies.For example, we advised Microsoft in its JV with China Electronic Technology Corporation (CETC) to license, deploy, manage and optimise Windows 10 for China’s government agencies and certain SOEs in critical infrastructure sectors and to provide continuing support and services for these customers. This work was innovative, as it was tailor-made for Microsoft in China and unique to

the PRC. This joint venture, which required careful structuring of ownership of IP rights and implementation of localisation in order to address the needs of the PRC governments and SoE customers and at the same time protecting Microsoft’s IP rights.

AMC: What qualities do you think make a good Paul, Weiss lawyer and how does the firm attempt to mould such a person? What do you find most refreshing and also lacking in the new generation of lawyers?Chan: Paul, Weiss lawyers consistently provide top-quality legal advice and excellent service. The firm’s solution-driven approach has really worked in our favour, as our lawyers are taught to think outside of the box and we look at matters from different angles. Quality lawyering involves more than just drafting a perfect document; it requires understanding the needs of the client, the unique considerations that relate to practicing law in this region and good judgment. Training is critical to the success of a Paul, Weiss lawyer — with training, supervision and good exposure to complex transactions, Paul, Weiss lawyers gain valuable experience. Experience is the key to be able to exercise good judgment. We regularly review performance of and give support to our lawyers wherever and whenever it is needed. I thoroughly enjoy working with associates of all levels in our China practice because they all contribute unique talents and perspectives.

DRAFT


ASIAN-MENA COUNSEL Q&AASIAN-MENA COUNSEL Q&A


AMC: What is your hinterland (ie, what are your interests outside of Paul, Weiss)? How do you control your time so that you can pursue them?Chan: I really enjoy my work. Every day is different and every day brings a new challenge. I love the many facets of my role where I get to meet new (and existing) clients regularly; developing and nurturing those relationships is extremely satisfying. I very much enjoy drafting and attending negotiations. I am very hands on and play an active role in the transactions that I oversee. Having said that, I make sure to set aside some personal time for myself, and one of the things I make time for every day is exercising. I love going to the gym and I do Muay Thai boxing. Everyone in the office knows that I love to run, box and stay active.As the first female Asian partner at Paul, Weiss, I am also very passionate about advancing the gender discussion. I fully support causes and events led by organisations like The Women’s Foundation, 100 Women in Finance, 30 percent Club and Women in Law Hong Kong. I love reading about the profiles of successful women and their journeys inspire me.I am proud that Paul, Weiss invests in initiatives that promote the advancement of women and women’s issues. We make sure these are among our top priorities, and we are one of the few law firms to appoint a Women’s Initiative Director. Further, our chairman Brad Karp was recently named “Man of Distinction” by Legal Momentum, a US non-profit organisation advocating for the legal rights of women and girls. Brad is the second man and the first law firm partner to receive this recognition, which reflects his extraordinary dedication and commitment to gender equality.

Jeanette Chan is one of Asia’s elite law firm leaders; having helped shape the landscape of the industry for over three decades. As the firm’s first Managing Partner of the China Practice, Jeanette has been able to balance her legal prowess, service to clients, business development, and day-to-day management of Paul, Weiss’ China practice, which has led to the team’s continued success. In addition to her vast legal advice, Jeanette leads the China Practice and the day-to-day running of the Beijing and Hong Kong offices.Jeanette’s practice focuses on cross-border mergers and acquisitions and private equity investments, with a particular emphasis on joint ventures and in the telecommunications, IT and media markets in the Asia Pacific region. She has been an active participant in those markets in the Greater China region since 1994, when mainland China and Taiwan first opened their telecoms industries to foreign investors. The other industries Jeanette has been actively involved in include insurance, education, pharmaceuticals, health care, and automobile. She also spent almost two years as the Senior International Legal Adviser of Cable & Wireless, assisting with their operations and business development teams in the Asia Pacific region.Jeanette is admitted to practice law in New York, Canada and Hong Kong and is a non-practicing solicitor of England and Wales. She completed her BA from the University of Toronto, LLB from the University of British Columbia and LLM from Harvard Law School. Jeanette is frequently recognised by various legal publications such as Chambers, as one of the world’s leading PRC law practitioners: particularly in the communications, media and technology industries.

DRAFTQuality lawyering involves more than just drafting a perfect document; it requires understanding the needs of the client, the unique considerations that relate to practicing law in this region and good judgment.




Your ‘at a glance’ guide to some of the region’s top service providers.

Indicates an AsiAn-menA Counsel Firm of the Year. 2014 2015 2016

MR An AsiAn-menA Counsel Most Responsive Firm of the Year.

— Law Firms —ASIA

Practice Area key:INV Alt’ Investment Funds (inc. PE)

COM Antitrust / Competition AV AviationBF Banking & FinanceCM Capital Markets

CMA Corporate & M&A

E EmploymentENR Energy & Natural ResourcesENV EnvironmentIA International ArbitrationIP Intellectual PropertyIF Islamic Finance

INS InsuranceLS Life Sciences

LDR Litigation & Dispute ResolutionMS Maritime & ShippingPF Projects & Project Finance

(inc. Infrastructure)

RE Real Estate / ConstructionREG Regulatory / Compliance RES Restructuring & InsolvencyTX Taxation

TMT Telecoms, Media & Technology

MR An AsiAn-menA Counsel Honourable Mention Most Responsive Firm of the Year.

One of this firm’s five largest practice areas in this jurisdiction. Indicates a full service firm in this jurisdiction.

ASIAN-MENA COUNSEL DIRECT


CHINAAWA IP (Beijing) Co., Ltd.Tel: 86 10 8573 1125Email: [email protected]: Ai-Leen LimWebsite: www.awapatent.com

IP TMT

——————

Broad & BrightTel: 8610 8513 1818 Email: [email protected] Contacts: Mr Jun Ji ([email protected])Website: www.broadbright.comCOM CMA LDR TMT ENR

——————

East & Concord Partners Tel: (86) 10 6590 6639 Email: [email protected] Contact: Mr. Qi Zhou Website: www.east-concord.com

BF CM CMA IP LDR

——————

HHP Attorneys-At-LawTel: (86) 21 5047 3330Email: [email protected] Contacts: Mr. Yao RAOWebsite: http://www.hhp.com.cn

BF CMA E LDR RE

——————

Llinks Law OfficesTel: 8621-31358666Email: [email protected]: www.llinkslaw.com

BF CM CMA INV LDR

HONG KONGAWA Asia LimitedTel: (852) 3959 8880Email: [email protected]: Ai-Leen LimWebsite: www.awapatent.com

IP TMT

CAMBODIA/LAOS/MYANMARCAMBODIA:Bun & AssociatesTel: (855) 23 999 567Email: [email protected] Contact: Bun YoudyWebsite: www.bun-associates.com

BF CMA INS RE TX

——————SCL SP&P Company Limited (Cambodia)(SCL Law Group)Tel: (856) 21 222 732-3Email: [email protected]: Varavudh MeesaiyatiWebsite: www.siamcitylaw.com

BF CMA E IP TX

——————LAOS: SCL Law Offices Limited (Lao PDR)(SCL Law Group)Tel: (856) 21 222 732-3Email: [email protected]: Nilobon TangprasitWebsite: www.siamcitylaw.com

BF CMA E PF RES

——————MYANMAR:Myanmar Legal Services LimitedTel: 951-657792; 951-650740Email: [email protected]: Daw Khin Cho Kyi ([email protected]) Guillaume E. Stafford ([email protected]) Website: www.myanmarlegalservices.comCMA E ENR PF RE

——————Siam City Law (Myanmar) Company Limited(SCL Law Group)Tel: (951) 653348-49Email: [email protected] Contact: Vira KammeeWebsite: www.siamcitylaw.com

CM CMA E IP PF

INDIA Anand and Anand 2014 2015 2016

Tel: (91) 120-4059300Email: [email protected]: Pravin Anand (Managing Partner)Website: www.anandandanand.com

IP LDR

——————

Clasis LawTel: +91 11 4213 0000 / +91 22 4910 0000Email(s): [email protected] Contact(s): Vineet Aneja / Mustafa MotiwalaWebsite: www.clasislaw.comCMA E IP LDR REG

INDONESIAAli Budiardjo, Nugroho, Reksodiputro 2013 2014 2015 Tel: (62) 21 250 5125/5136Email: [email protected] [email protected]: Emir Nurmansyah Nafis Adwani Agus Ahadi Deradjat Email: [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]: www.abnrlaw.com

MR BF CM CMA ENR PF

——————

Assegaf Hamzah & Partners 2014 2015 2016

Jakarta Office:Tel: (62) 21 25557800Email: [email protected]: Fikri Assegaf ([email protected]) Bono Adji ([email protected]) Eri Hertiawan ([email protected]) Eko Basyuni ([email protected]) Surabaya Office: Tel: (62) 31 5116 4550Contact: Yogi Marsono ([email protected])Website: www.ahp.co.id

MR BF CM CMA LDR PF



http://www.awapatent.com



http://www.broadbright.com


http://www.east-concord.com


http://www.hhp.com.cn


http://www.llinkslaw.com


http://www.awapatent.com


http://www.bun-associates.com


http://www.siamcitylaw.com






http://www.myanmarlegalservices.com




http://www.anandandanand.com


http://www.clasislaw.com






http://www.abnrlaw.com







http://www.ahp.co.id


Lubis Ganie Surowidjojo 2014 2015 2016

Tel: (62) 21 831 5005, 831 5025Email: [email protected]: Timbul Thomas Lubis, Dr. M. Idwan (‘Kiki’) Ganie, Arief Tarunakarya Surowidjojo, Abdul Haris M Rum, Harjon Sinaga, Rofik Sungkar, Dini Retnoningsih, Mochamad Fajar Syamsualdi and Ahmad Jamal Assegaf.Website: http://www.lgslaw.co.id

MR LDR PF CMA COM INS

——————

Makarim & Taira S. 2014 2015 Tel: (62) 21 252 1272, 520 0001Email: [email protected]: Rahayu Ningsih HoedWebsite: www.makarim.com

BF CMA E LDR PF

——————

Mochtar Karuwin Komar 2010 2011 2015

Tel: (62) 21 5711130Email: [email protected] / [email protected]: Emir KusumaatmadjaWebsite: www.mkklaw.net

AV CMA ENR LDR PF

——————

SSEK Legal Consultants 2014 2015 2016

Tel: (62) 21 521 2038, 2953 2000 Email: [email protected] Contact: Rusmaini Lenggogeni (Managing Partner) Website: www.ssek.com Blog: Indonesian Insights (http://blog.ssek.com/) Twitter: @ssek_lawfirm

BF CMA ENR MS RE

MALAYSIAAzmi & AssociatesTel: (603) 2118 5000Email: [email protected] Contact: Dato’ Azmi Mohd Ali (Senior Partner)Website: www.azmilaw.com

BF CM CMA ENR PF

——————

Raja, Darryl & Loh 2014 2015 2016

Tel: (603) 2694 9999 Email: [email protected]: Dato’ M. RajasekaranWebsite: http://www.rajadarrylloh.com

MR CMA IP LDR RE TX

——————

Trowers & Hamlins LLP 2015 2016

Tel: (601) 2615 0186Email: [email protected]: Nick White, PartnerWebsite: www.trowers.com

BF CMA ENR IF PF

PHILIPPINESACCRALAW (Angara Abello Concepcion Regala and Cruz Law Offices) 2015 2016

Tel: (632) 830 8000Email: [email protected]: Emerico O. De Guzman Regina Padilla Geraldez Neptali B. SalvaneraWebsite: www.accralaw.com

MR CMA E IP LDR TX

——————

Morales Justiniano Peña & Lumagui Tel: (632) 834 2551; (632) 832 7198; (632) 833 8534Email: [email protected]: Mr. Rafael Morales - Managing PartnerWebsite: www.primuslex.com

BF CM CMA IP LDR

——————

SyCip Salazar Hernandez & Gatmaitan 2011 2015 2016

Tel: (632) 9823500; 9823600; 9823700Email: [email protected]: Hector M. de Leon, Jr. - Managing Partner Website: www.syciplaw.com

MR BF CMA E ENR PF

——————

Villaraza & AngangcoTel: (632) 9886088Email: [email protected]: Franchette M. AcostaWebsite: www.thefirmva.comCMA IP LDR REG RES

SINGAPOREAdvocatus Law LLPTel: (65) 6603 9200Email: [email protected]: Christopher Anand Daniel, Managing Part-nerEmail: [email protected] Website: www.advocatus.sg CMA E IA LDR RES

——————

Eversheds Harry Elias LLPTel: (65) 6535 0550Email: [email protected]: Philip Fong, Managing Partner, Email: [email protected] Website: www.eversheds-harryelias.comCMA IA LDR RE RES

——————

Providence Law Asia LLCTel: (65) 6438 1969Email: [email protected]: Abraham Vergis, Managing Director Website: www.providencelawasia.com/CMA IA LDR RE RES

SOUTH KOREABae, Kim & Lee LLC

2014 2015 2016

Tel: (82 2) 3404 0000Email: [email protected]: Kyong Sun JungWebsite: www.bkl.co.kr

MR CM CMA IA LDR RE ——————

Cho & Partners 2012 Tel: (82-2) 6207-6800Email: [email protected]: Tae-Yeon Cho, Ik Hyun SeoWebsite: www.cholaw.com

IP LDR

——————

Jipyong 2012 2016

Tel: (82-2) 6200 1600Email: [email protected] Contact: Haeng-Gyu Lee (Partner) Website: www.jipyong.com

COM BF CMA RE LDR

——————

Kim & Chang 2014 2015 2016

Tel: (82-2) 3703-1114Email: [email protected]: www.kimchang.com

MR BF COM CMA IP LDR

——————

Lee International IP & Law Group 2012 2014 2015

Tel: (82 2) 2262 6000Email: [email protected]: www.leeinternational.comCMA IA IP LDR RE

——————

Shin & Kim 2014 2015 2016

Tel: (82 2) 316 4114Email: [email protected]: Sinseob Kang – Managing PartnerWebsite: www.shinkim.com

COM BF CMA LDR RE

——————

Yoon & Yang LLC 2014 2015 2016

Tel: (82 2) 6003 7000Email: [email protected]: Seung Soon Lim; Seung Soon Choi; Jinsu JeongWebsite: www.yoonyang.com

MR COM E IP LDR TX

——————

Yulchon LLC 2014 2015 2016

Tel: (82 2) 528 5200Email: [email protected]: www.yulchon.com

MR COM CMA IP LDR TX


http://www.lgslaw.co.id


http://www.makarim.com



http://www.mkklaw.net


http://www.ssek.com

http://blog.ssek.com/


http://www.azmilaw.com


http://www.rajadarrylloh.com


http://www.trowers.com




http://www.primuslex.com


http://www.syciplaw.com


http://www.thefirmva.com



http://www.advocatus.sg



http://www.eversheds-harryelias.com


http://www.providencelawasia.com/


http://www.bkl.co.kr


http://www.cholaw.com


http://www.jipyong.com


http://www.kimchang.com


http://www.leeinternational.com


http://www.shinkim.com


http://www.yoonyang.com


http://www.yulchon.com

— Law Firms —AFRICA

ASIAN-MENA COUNSEL DIRECT


TAIWANDeep & Far Attorneys-at-LawTel: (8862) 25856688Email: [email protected]: Mr. C. F. TsaiWebsite: www.deepnfar.com.twCOM CM E IP LDR

THAILANDChandler MHM Limited

2014 2015 2016

Tel: (66) 2266 6485Email: [email protected] [email protected]: Jessada Sawatdipong Satoshi KawaiWebsite: www.chandlermhm.com

MR BF CMA ENR PF REG

——————

Siam City Law Offices Limited(SCL Law Group) 2016

Tel: (66) 2 676 6667-8 Email: [email protected]: Chavalit UttasartWebsite: www.siamcitylaw.com

BF CMA E RE TX

——————

Weerawong, Chinnavat & Partners Ltd.Tel: (66) 2 264 8000Email: [email protected] [email protected] Contacts: Chinnavat Chinsangaram (Senior Partner) Veeranuch Thammavaranucupt (Senior Partner) Website: www.weerawongcp.com

BF CM CMA LDR RES

VIETNAMIndochine Counsel 2015 Ho Chi Minh Office:Tel: (848) 3823 9640Email: [email protected]: Mr Dang The DucWebsite: www.indochinecounsel.com Hanoi Office:Tel: (844) 3795 5261Email: [email protected] CM PF

Horizons & Co Tel: (971) 4 354 4444Email: [email protected]: Adv. Ali Al Zarooni Website: www.horizlaw.ae CMA E LDR PF RE

—————

Trowers & Hamlins LLP 2015 2016

Dubai office:Tel: (971) 4 351 9201Email: [email protected]: Jehan Selim, Office ManagerAbu Dhabi office:Tel: (971) 2 410 7600Email: [email protected]: Jehan Selim, Office Manager Website: www.trowers.com

MR BF CMA LDR PF RES

CANADAFasken MartineauTel: (416) 366-8381Email: [email protected]: Mark Stinson, Primary ContactWebsite: www.fasken.com

BF CMA ENR LDR TMT

JOHANNESBURGFasken MartineauTel: (27) 11 586 6000Email: [email protected]: Blaize Vance, Regional Managing PartnerWebsite: www.fasken.comCMA E ENR LDR PF

Russin & Vecchi 2015 2016

HCM City:Tel: (84-28) 3824-3026Email: [email protected]: Sesto E Vecchi – Managing Partner Nguyen Huu Minh Nhut – Partner Nguyen Huu Hoai – Partner Hanoi: Tel: (84-24) 3825-1700Email: [email protected]: Mai Minh Hang - PartnerWebsite: www.russinvecchi.com.vn

MR CMA E IP INS TMT

——————

VILAFTel: (84) 28 3827 7300; (84) 24 39348530Email: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Contacts: Vo Ha Duyen; Nguyen Truc Hien; Dang Duong AnhWebsite: www.vilaf.com

BF CM ENR LDR RE

BAHRAINTrowers & HamlinsTel: (973) 1 751 5600Email: [email protected]: Louise Edwards, Office ManagerWebsite: www.trowers.com

BF CMA IF LDR RE

—————

OMANTrowers & HamlinsTel: (968) 2 468 2900Email: [email protected]: Louise Edwards, Office ManagerWebsite: www.trowers.com

BF CMA LDR PF RE

—————

UAEAfridi & Angell 2016

Tel: (971) 4 330 3900 Email: [email protected] Contact: Bashir Ahmed, Managing Partner Website: www.afridi-angell.com

BF CMA LDR RE REG

— Law Firms —MIDDLE EAST

— Law Firms —NORTH AMERICA

Looking for something else? We’re happy to help if we can!

Email our Head of Research, Yvette Tan at [email protected] with ‘Asian-mena Counsel Enquiry” in the subject line. ?


http://www.deepnfar.com.tw



http://www.chandlermhm.com





http://www.weerawongcp.com


http://www.indochinecounsel.com




http://www.horizlaw.ae





http://www.fasken.com


http://www.fasken.com



http://www.russinvecchi.com.vn




http://www.vilaf.com






http://www.afridi-angell.com


— Recruitment —

Risk, Investigation – and Litigation –

Support

— Other Services —

— Translation —

Charitable—Organisations

—

Arbitration — Services

—

Be Here Now!and online at

www.inhousecommunity.com

Email Rahul Prakash

[email protected]

with ‘AsiAn-menA Counsel Direct’ in the subject line for more

information.


ALS InternationalTel: Hong Kong – (852) 2920 9100 Singapore – (65) 6557 4163 Beijing – (86) 10 6567 8729 Shanghai – (86) 10 6372 1098 Email: [email protected]: alsrecruit.com

——————Hughes-Castell Tel: Hong Kong (852) 2520 1168Tel: Singapore (65) 6220 2722Tel: Beijing (86) 10 6581 1781Tel: Shanghai (86) 21 2206 1200Email: [email protected]: www.hughes-castell.com

——————JLegalTel: (65) 6818 9701Email: [email protected]: www.jlegal.com

——————Legal Labs RecruitmentTel: Singapore (65) 6236 0166Tel: Hong Kong (852) 2526 2981Email: [email protected]: www.legallabs.com

——————Lewis SandersTel: (852) 2537 7410Email: [email protected]: www.lewissanders.com

——————Pure Search InternationalTel: Hong Kong (852) 2499 1611Email: Hong Kong [email protected]: Singapore (65) 6407 1200Email: Singapore [email protected]: www.puresearch.com

——————Taylor RootTel: Singapore (65) 6420 0500Tel: Hong Kong (852) 2973 6333Email: [email protected]: www.taylorroot.com

IMF BenthamTel: (65) 6622 5397/ (65) 6622 5396Contact: Tom Glasgow, Investment Manager (Asia)Email: [email protected]: www.imf.sg

——————

KrollTel: (852) 2884 7788Contacts: Tad Kageyama: [email protected] Colum Bancroft: [email protected]: www.krolladvisory.com

Beijing Arbitration Commission / Beijing International Arbitration Center (Concurrently use)Tel: (86) 10 65669856Email: [email protected]: Mr. Jie Xu (許捷)Website: www.bjac.org.cn

——————

Hong Kong International Arbitration CentreTel: (852) 2525 2381Email: [email protected]: www.hkiac.org

Pacific Legal Translations LimitedSpecialist translators serving the legal community.Tel: (852) 2705-9456Email: [email protected]: www.paclegal.com

Impact India FoundationAn international initiative against avoidable disablement.Promoted by the UNDP, UNICEF and the World Health Organization in association with the Government of India.Tel: (91) 22 6633 9605 -7Email: [email protected]: www.impactindia.org

APPARELZen Tailor Shop No.B,2/F., Entertainment Building,30 Queen’s Road Central. Hong KongTel: (852) 2868 2948* Show your copy of AsiAn-menA Counsel (or this page)

to receive a 10% discount at Zen Tailor!

••••••••••••

MEDITATION Kadampa Meditation Centre Hong Kong KMC HK is a registered non-profit organisation. We offer systematic meditation and study programmes through drop-in classes, day courses, lunchtime meditations, weekend retreats and other classes. Tel: (852) 2507 2237 Email: [email protected] Website: http://www.meditation.hk

••••••••••••

MANDARINHong Kong Mandarin SchoolHong Kong Mandarin School– for business Putoghua.Tel: (852) 2287 5072Fax: (852) 2287 5237Email: [email protected]: www.mandarinlearning.hk

••••••••••••

SPORT & LEISURESplash Diving (HK) LimitedLearn to Dive and Fun Dive with the Winner of the PADI Outstanding Dive Centre/Resort Business Award!Tel: (852) 9047 9603 / (852) 2792 4495Email: [email protected]: http://www.splashhk.com/


http://www.bjac.org.cn


http://www.hkiac.org



http://www.hughes-castell.com


http://www.jlegal.com


http://www.legallabs.com


http://www.lewissanders.com



http://www.puresearch.com


http://www.taylorroot.com


http://www.meditation.hk


http://www.mandarinlearning.hk


http://www.splashhk.com/


http://www.imf.sg



http://www.krolladvisory.com




http://www.paclegal.com


http://www.impactindia.org

YES, I would like to receive a hard copy of every issue of asian-mena Counsel

magazine (published 10 times a year) at US$299 p.a.

Payment method: Cheque Bank TT PayPal (details will be sent to you)

Documents

asian-mena Counsel - In-House Community · asian-mena Counsel | MAGAZINE FOR THEIN ... Arun Mistry – Director ISSN 2223-8697 ... System Act (CISA), Real Estate Investment Trust