IHC Magazine - April 2023 issue, Focus on Data Protection

PUBLISHER

Rahul Prakash

+852 8170 2951

rahul.prakash@ inhousecommunity.com

LEAD DESIGNER

Richard Oliver

EDITOR

Caitlin van Rensburg

WRITER

Butch Bacaoco

CLIENT RELATIONSHIP

MANAGER

Toni Angeline Dorotheo

Published 10 times annually by InHouse Community Ltd.

Publishers of

• In-House Community Magazine

• IHC Briefing

Organisers of the

• IHC Events

Hosts of

• www.inhousecommunity.com

• www.mycareerinlaw.com

Forums for the In-House Community

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

© 2022 InHouse Community Limited and contributors.

Feature contributors

Denny Rahmansyah, Partner, SSEK

Denny is an extensively experienced lawyer who joined SSEK in 2001. He has been involved in major projects and transactions in various sectors, including TMT (fintech/e-commerce, cryptocurrency, data protection/privacy).

Agung Kurniawan Sihombing, Associate, SSEK

Agung works on corporate transactions, privacy matters, and projects and transactions in the ecommerce, payment systems, financial services, environment, employment, and immigration sectors.

Mark Johnson, Partner, Debevoise & Plimpton - Hong Kong

Mark Johnson is a partner in the firm’s Hong Kong office and a member of the International Dispute Resolution Group. His practice focuses on commercial litigation, international arbitration and white collar/regulatory defense matters, particularly in the financial services sector.

Philip Rohlik, Counsel, Debevoise & Plimpton - Shanghai

Philip Rohlik is a member of the firm’s Litigation Group whose practice focuses on international investigations, securities law and dispute resolution. Mr. Rohlik’s varied practice has included representation of U.S. and multinational companies in complex litigation and investigations, as well as in cybersecurity and data privacy issues, with a particular focus on Asia.

Waewpen Piemwichai, Senior Associate, Tilleke & Gibbins - Hanoi

EDITORIAL GUIDANCE PANEL

Carina Wessels

Executive: Governance, Legal and Compliance, Alexander Forbes Group Holdings

Preeti Balwani

General Counsel at Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages

Ron Yu

University of Hong Kong, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology

Stanley Lui

APAC

Legal Director,

TI Fluid Systems Co-Founder, White Hat Guys

In-House Community

Waewpen Piemwichai is a senior associate with the Tilleke & Gibbins corporate and commercial group. Her practice focuses primarily on the technology, media, and telecommunications (TMT) sector.

Magazine

Trung Bao Tran, Associate, Tilleke & GibbinsHo Chi Minh City

Trung Bao Tran is an associate in the firm’s Ho Chi Minh City office. Trung’s practice focuses on all aspects of tech/media/telecom, data protection, and intellectual property laws. He also handles technology transfer contracting and regulatory advice.

Carl Watson General Counsel, Arcadis Asia

Raymond Goh General Counsel, International of China Tourism Group

Sally Dyson Director, Firm Sense

Yosr Hamza Director, Legal Counsel, Gartner

Navrita Kaur Chief Legal Officer, Omesti Group

Rebecca Hong Managing Counsel, Intel Corporation

Sesto Vecchi Managing Partner, Russin & Vecchi

Dentons to Combine with PJS Law in the Philippines

Dentons intends to combine with Philippine law firm PJS Law, in a combination foreseen to accelerate Dentons’ momentum to become the leading global law firm in the ASEAN and, with offices in Indonesia, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore and Vietnam, allow Dentons to connect clients to talent in six of the largest ASEAN economies

The combination solidifies a longstanding cooperation between the two firms, culminating in the world’s largest global law firm helping clients to meet the challenges and opportunities in one of the fastest-growing emerging markets. Following approval by the partners, the combination is expected to launch in the coming months.

PJS Law’s reputation as a leading service provider in the Philippines, coupled with Dentons’ worldwide reach, would enable the combined firm to help clients to grow, protect, operate and finance what is important to them in the Philippines and in 214 locations in 83 countries around the world.

Dentons’ unique polycentric approach has been a differentiator, disrupting the traditional model for providing legal services in the

ASEAN. As each new combination firm joins with Dentons, it can be assured that it will retain local control of its operations, finances and office leadership.

“PJS Law and Dentons share the vision of leading the way for differentiated client service in ASEAN,” said PJS Law CEO Regina JacintoBarrientos. “Our future combination means that we continue to deliver sustainable solutions, first-rate performance and exceptional client care representative of the PJS brand, while our clients also benefit from having access to more than 21,000 professionals around the globe.”

Elliott Portnoy, Global CEO of Dentons, said, “PJS Law’s excellent standing in the marketplace made them the compelling and inspiring combination partner for Dentons in

this critical market for our clients. Founding Partners Regina Jacinto-Barrientos and Roy Santos, with their strong leadership team, have built an impressive firm that prioritises inclusion and diversity, and is known for outstanding client service. The combination will allow us to provide clients with local knowledge and global insights across ASEAN and around the world.”

PJS Law is a full-service law firm in the Philippine market with 57 lawyers and professionals. It is owned and led by 19 partners, 57 percent of whom are women. PJS Law is widely recognised in the market for Energy and Infrastructure, Projects, Corporate, M&A, Banking and Finance, Capital Markets and Dispute Resolution.

Kuok Yew Chen is Christopher & Lee Ong’s New Managing Partner

He succeeds Yon See Ting, who handed over the reins after four years at the helm. See Ting will continue in her Corporate M&A practice, and head the Firm’s Competition and Anti-trust Practice Group.

During her tenure as Managing Partner, See Ting prioritised a balanced, inclusive and people-first work environment that allowed the firm to attract and retain top talent lawyers and business professionals.

She also laid a solid foundation in governance and industry expertise for CLO, which translated to new practice areas being introduced to meet growing client needs, as well as ensuring clients have a safe pair of hands for their transactions and business ventures.

Stepping into the role of Managing Partner, Yew Chen brings with him valuable experience and knowledge in both legal practice and management, and is known for his strategic vision, strong relationships with clients, and ability to drive growth and innovation.

Christopher & Lee Ong (CLO), a member firm of Rajah & Tann Asia (RTA), has appointed Kuok Yew Chen as Managing Partner with effect from 1 April 2023.

“CLO has grown to over 100 fee earners since its inception 10 years ago. The challenge ahead would be to maintain the momentum and growth, given local and global headwinds. However, I am cautiously optimistic that, together with my colleagues at CLO and RTA, and the invaluable support of our clients and business partners, we will be able to build on the solid foundations laid over the last decade, and continue to grow from strength

Rajah & Tann Singapore Lawyers Launch Setia Law

providing dedicated service to our clients and to remain agile in being innovative and solutions-driven, to drive the best outcomes for our clients. We will do this by continuing to approach our mandates with creativity and commitment, whilst mentoring and developing some of the most talented legal minds in the industry,” said Danny Ong, Managing Director of Setia Law.

Won counsels both Korean and international clients on intellectual property-related issues, including those involving trade secret compliance and litigation, as well as international trade and antitrust issues. He has also advised on renewable energy projects, M&A, project finance, employment, litigation and anti-corruption related issues.

Won succeeds Seoul partner Eric Yoon as the office’s chief legal representative, a role in which Yoon, who was instrumental in launching the office in 2012, has served ever since. He will continue as a partner with the firm in both Seoul and New York.

The firm’s Seoul office, in close cooperation with lawyers in the firm’s other offices and local Korean counsel firms, assists domestic clients with accessing foreign markets and resolving other legal issues overseas. The firm’s wider Korea practice, comprising lawyers in Seoul as well as overseas, assists Korean companies doing business in the US, the UK, Europe, the Middle East, Asia and beyond with their diverse contentious and non-contentious legal needs.

“I am honoured to be leading the Seoul office in our continued efforts for global integration and the highest quality client service,” Won said. “In this critical time of rapid change, when many Korean companies are quickly expanding to many different countries, we are dedicated to supporting our clients’ smooth transitions abroad. As managing partner of our Seoul office, I am committed to positioning our firm to be the leading provider of insightful, practical solutions for our clients in the Korean market and beyond.”

“We congratulate Tyler as he embarks in this new leadership position with the firm,” said K&L Gates Global Managing Partner Jim Segerdahl. “He has built an extremely strong practice, and has emerged as a trusted advisor to numerous multinational companies that have legal needs spanning the globe and that are based in, or otherwise have ties to, Korea.”

MOVES

S&R Associates has added Ajinkya Gunjan Mishra as a partner based in the firm’s New Delhi office. Mishra’s practice focuses on indirect tax and trade law. He advises global and Indian clients on indirect tax, in relation to domestic and cross-border acquisitions and an array of complex operational matters, including tax planning strategy, supply chain structuring for products and services, tax assessment, audit and controversy, and tax restructuring and compliance. Mishra also advises multinational companies on various regulatory matters, including trade incentives under foreign trade policy, free trade agreements and export/fiscal incentive schemes, such as Special Economic Zones, Export Oriented Units and Software Technology Parks of India, as well as market entry analysis and structuring. He has represented clients before various tax tribunals and adjudicating authorities, including the Authority for Advance Rulings, the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, the Directorate General of Trade Remedies and the National Anti-Profiteering Authority. Mishra received a BA, LLB (Hons) from the National Law Institute University Bhopal in 2007, and an MBA (International Business) from the Indian Institute of Foreign Trade New Delhi in 2013. His prior experience includes working with Luthra and Luthra Law Offices, where he was a partner, and EY in New Delhi.

Trilegal has re-inducted one of its co-founders and former partners Akshay Jaitly to the firm, effective 1 April 2023. Jaitly had retired from the firm’s partnership in 2020 after relocating

to France, and had remained associated with the firm as a member of the Board. With his return to New Delhi, he will be reinstated as an equity partner. Jaitly was a partner with the firm for two decades, before stepping down in 2020, due to his relocation. With nearly 25 years of experience, and as one of the most renowned names in the projects space, Jaitly has extensively assisted in policy and strategic advisory on India’s energy transition, and the role of the rule of law in India’s growing economy. He holds a bachelor’s degree in history from St Stephen’s College, University of Delhi, a Master’s in international affairs from Columbia University, and a degree in law from the University of Oxford.

Norton Rose Fulbright has strengthened its restructuring practice with the addition of Meiyen Tan as partner in the Singapore office to lead the Singapore restructuring practice. She has also joined as a director of Ascendant Legal, the Formal Law Alliance with Norton Rose Fulbright. Tan has a broad financial restructuring and insolvency practice that covers both contentious and non-contentious work. She has extensive experience representing international clients in the Singapore courts. As a Singapore-qualified advocate, she holds rights of audience in the Singapore courts, and has represented a range of debtor side clients and appointees in formal and informal restructuring and insolvency proceedings. Tan joins the firm from Oon & Bazul, where she established the restructuring and insolvency practice.

K&L Gates Straits Law, the Singapore office of global law firm K&L Gates, has added project finance lawyer Sarah Park as a partner in the

MOVES

corporate practice. Joining from White & Case, she will start in April 2023. Park is a highly regarded practitioner who advises sponsors, developers, export agencies, commercial lenders, private equity firms and global conglomerates on a broad spectrum of renewables, project development, project financing, corporate, cross-border M&A and private equity matters across the US, Asia, the Middle East and Europe. She has extensive knowledge of and experience in the renewable energy, energy transition, infrastructure, oil & gas and LNG sectors.

Squire Patton Boggs has further strengthened its Global Data Privacy, Cybersecurity and Digital Assets Practice with the addition of partner Charmian Aw, who joins the firm in Singapore from Reed Smith. Aw’s arrival follows multiple hires the firm has made across the US and EMEA to assist clients managing evolving data, digital and cyber risks and rewards in an era of changing technologies and regulations. Aw has spearheaded multijurisdictional projects spanning regulatory compliance, data governance, digital transformation, emerging technologies, cybersecurity readiness and incident response, and cross-border transfers; she represents leading APAC and global companies. She has successfully advised clients on time-sensitive data investigations and breach reporting across the Asia Pacific region. Aw previously practiced at Drew & Napier in Singapore; she has also worked as in-house counsel for Singapore Telecommunications, as well as had secondments at ESPN Star Sports and

Discovery Asia. Aw earned her LLB from National University of Singapore with honours.

Rajah & Tann has added Dr Vanina Sucharitkul as a partner in its regional International Arbitration practice, effective 1 March 2023. Sucharitkul brings a wealth of experience to the firm, having been admitted to the California Bar and holding degrees from top institutions in the US and Paris, including a Juris Doctor from the University of California College of the Law and a Docteur en Droit on Investor-State Dispute Settlement from the University of Paris PanthéonAssas. Being of mixed Thai and French heritage and a citizen of France, Thailand and the US, she has a unique cross-cultural perspective on international disputes. Her experience working at international law firms in San Francisco, Bangkok, Paris and Hong Kong has also equipped her with expertise that goes beyond geographical boundaries. As a result, Sucharitkul is well-placed to advise on issues that arise both within and outside of the region. She is fluent in English, Thai and French. A leading practitioner in international arbitration, she was previously a member of the International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce for Thailand for nine years. She currently chairs the Thailand Branch of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, and has served as Director of ArbitralWomen for two terms. In addition, Sucharitkul regularly sits as arbitrator under the auspices of a number of arbitral institutions, including the ICC, Singapore International Arbitration Centre, Asian International Arbitration Centre, Shenzhen Court of International Arbitration and Thai Arbitration Institute. Initially based in Bangkok, she will be

MOVES

working closely with the Singapore office with a view to eventually relocate to Singapore.

Elvinger Hoss Prussen has continued to expand its global financial services regulatory practice with the addition of Henri Wagner as a partner in its global Corporate and Financial Services

customs matters, in addition to representing multinational companies in a variety of M&A transactions, including outbound and inbound investments and joint ventures. Most notably, Lee advised Allianz on its sale of Allianz Korea to the Anbang Group in 2017, and a consortium led by POSCO on its acquisition of a minority interest in the ArcelorMittal Mines Canada mining business in . Prior

MOVES

has been a member of the China Bar since 2001. Lastly, Sung Jin Ro (US-qualified) has extensive experience in technologydriven industries, notably from his previous positions at Jusung Engineering, Emerson Automation Solutions Korea and, most recently, Versum Materials Korea, a global material manufacturer for the semiconductor and display industries. He worked at Versum Materials Korea from 2016 and, as general counsel, he comprehensively supervised legal affairs, including labour management, post-merger integration and foreign direct investments. Prior to working at Versum Materials Korea, Sung was a senior contract and compliance officer at Emerson Automation Solutions Korea. He was in charge of providing legal advice within the company, reviewing legal contracts, operating the company’s compliance programs, and handling communications between the group’s headquarters and the Korean subsidiary. At Jusung Engineering, a leading semiconductor/photovoltaic manufacturing tool maker based in Korea, Sung headed the legal affairs team and handled labour conflicts, supplier relationships and government affairs regarding new regulations affecting the company. Sung received his JD from Lewis & Clark Law School in 2007, and his BA from Yonsei University in 1997. He has been a member of the New York Bar since 2008.

Goodwin has added Matthew Nortcliff to its private investment funds practice as a partner, resident in the Singapore office which opened in October 2022. Based in Singapore since 2010, Nortcliff represents

clients with a particular focus on the real assets, private equity, venture capital and technology sectors. He advises managers on the establishment and operation (including regulatory matters) of a wide range of funds, structured investments and joint ventures. He also advises investors on their fund investments and corporate and real asset transactions across Asia and globally. Prior to joining the firm, Nortcliff led an international law firm’s funds and indirect real assets practice in Asia.

Luthra and Luthra Law

Offices India has added Shreya Sircar as a partner in the dispute resolution practice. Sircar is a highly regarded lawyer with over 13 years of experience in dispute resolution. Prior to joining the firm, she was associated with Barucha & Partners and Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas, where she advised clients on complex commercial disputes, arbitration and litigation matters. Shreya will focus on representing clients in high-stakes commercial disputes, including arbitration and litigation. She brings with her a wealth of experience and expertise, and her addition to the firm will strengthen its already impressive dispute resolution practice. Sircar is an alum of Campus Law Centre, University of Delhi, and holds an LLM from New York University School of Law.

Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher has added banking and finance partner Laleh Shahabi, who joins the firm’s newly opened Abu Dhabi office. Shahabi advises on a

MOVES

wide range of banking and financing transactions, including project financing and refinancing, leveraged and acquisition financing, direct lending and investment grade corporate financing. She is experienced in representing corporate sponsors, governments, government-related entities and financial institutions in a wide range of financing transactions in Europe, the Middle East and Asia. She has a particular focus on the transitional energy, renewables and oil and gas sectors.

Clifford Chance has added market leading technology specialist Stella Cramer as a partner based in Singapore. She will lead the firm’s Tech Group in Asia Pacific. Cramer brings more than 15 years of working in Asia Pacific, and has extensive experience in complex digital and transformational technology projects, platform collaborations and technology transactions, often involving disruptive technologies, such as blockchain and artificial intelligence. She also has deep experience advising clients on global data compliance programmes, the commercialisation of data and high-profile cyber incidents. Cramer has advised on significant Fintech projects, and was involved in the set-up of industry sandboxes. She also serves on specialist advisory committees covering the regulation of data, blockchain and artificial intelligence in Singapore and regionally. Joining from Norton Rose Fulbright, Cramer previously held in-house roles at two global banks, where she focused on technology, data and digitalisation projects across multiple jurisdictions.

Luthra and Luthra Law

Offices has added Vikash Kukreti as a new partner to further strengthen its Technology-Media-Telecom (TMT) Practice. Kukreti has over 20 years of experience. He was previously associated with Ernest & Young as Director for Regulatory Consulting. He has been a qualified Company Secretary since 2002, post which he graduated with an LLB in 2008 from Delhi University. Kukreti led a team of lawyers to ensure compliance, regulatory and other disputes/litigations, contracts, business and operational issues, and policy and governance implementation during his four-year stint at Telenor.

Cyril Amarchand

Mangaldas has added Aarushi Jain as a partner in its Technology-MediaTelecom (TMT) practice, as head of media-education-gaming. She will be based in Mumbai. Jain has over 14 years of experience in advising media, technology, education, gaming and new tech clients, both domestic and international, on legal, regulatory and commercial issues. She focuses on helping clients on strategic legal issues, navigate cross-border issues, renders legal and regulatory advice for business continuity and new-business launch, helps with documentation, negotiations, deal-making, legal risk analysis, pre-litigation, policy and new-evolving legal nuances. She also has expertise in IP advisory, IP and Tech structuring, acquisitions, collaborations and joint ventures, data privacy, cybersecurity and emerging tech-related legal issues. Jain is a graduate from ILS Law College, Pune in 2009.

Allen & Gledhill has acted as transaction counsel to international healthcare provider IHH Healthcare on its investment into Intellect, a digital mental health platform with more than three million users in over 20 countries. IHH is the first strategic healthcare investor in Intellect. Partners Julian Ho and Alexander Yap led the firm’s team in the transaction.

Allen & Overy has advised the underwriters on the IPO and listing of ADNOC Gas in Abu Dhabi. The IPO comprised a sale by the majority shareholder, Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC), of an approximately five percent stake in ADNOC Gas, and raised gross proceeds of approximately US2.5 $ billion, with an implied market capitalisation for ADNOC Gas of approximately US50 $ billion at the time of listing. The IPO marks the world’s largest listing in 2023, and the largest ever listing in Abu Dhabi. The IPO was multiple times oversubscribed, with significant demand from UAE investors, as well as regional and international investors. Total

DEALS

gross demand for the IPO amounted to over US124 $ billion, implying an oversubscription level of more than 50 times. Abu Dhabi partner Khalid Garousha and US securities partner Jeff Hendrickson led the firm’s team in the transaction.

AZB & Partners has advised Parksons Packaging on its acquisition of 100 percent of the share capital of MK Printpack. Green Fin Investments, an affiliate of Warburg Pincus, holds majority of the share capital of Parksons Packaging. Partners Anil Kasturi and Anisha Shridhar led the firm’s team in the transaction, which was completed on 27 March 2023.

Baker McKenzie has advised Victory Securities, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Hong Kong-listed Victory Securities (Holdings), on securing approval from the Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission (SFC) to manage investment funds that comprise up to 100 percent virtual assets. After becoming the first licensed corporation to be permitted to provide the full spectrum of virtual asset dealing and advisory services in Hong Kong, Victory Securities has now secured SFC consent to launch two cryptocurrency tracker funds. This approval makes Victory Securities the only licensed corporation in Hong Kong with the necessary regulatory approvals to provide virtual asset-related distribution, advisory and asset management services. Virtual assets specialists Joy Lam, Ryan Chan and Samantha W S Lai led the firm’s team in the transaction.

Baker McKenzie Wong & Leow, the member firm of Baker McKenzie International in Singapore, has advised GetGo

DEALS

Technologies (GetGo Carsharing) on a S20 $ million (US14.8 $m) fund raising from investment group Treïs Asia. The strategic investment will be used to accelerate the growth of GetGo’s electric fleet, and strengthen its technology and operational platform. GetGo is Singapore’s largest and fastest-growing carsharing platform with over 2,100 cars serving over 50,000 users. The platform currently has 90 electric vehicles within its fleet, and is targeting to have 10,000 greener vehicles by 2030. Principal Sze Shing Tan led the firm’s team in the transaction.

Clifford Chance has advised Hang Seng Investment Management (HSVM), Hong Kong’s No. 1 ETF manager in terms of assets under management, on the launch and listing in Hong Kong of the Hang Seng Stock Connect China A Low Carbon Index ETF. The new ETF is an index-tracking fund which aims to invest in China A-shares with low carbon exposures, and is the first low-carbon themed A-share ETF in Hong Kong. Providing investors with access to low carbon- and ESG-themed securities, constituents of the fund are included based on their compliance with the United Nations Global Compact principles, and weighted based on Carbon Emission Intensity data provided by ISS ESG. Partner Rocky Mui led the firm’s team in the transaction.

Clove Legal has represented Indigo Paints, a listed company and India’s fifth largest and fast-growing decorative paints brand, on the acquisition, via a combination of primary capital infusion and secondary purchase from the promoters, of 51 percent stake in Apple Chemie India, a company engaged

in construction chemicals and water proofing. Partner Dharmesh Kotadia led the firm’s team in the transaction.

Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas has advised JP Morgan India, as the broker, on the block sale of shares of Samvardhana Motherson International, with reported aggregate value of Rs16.12 billion (US$196m). Sumitomo Wiring Systems sold, via India’s stock exchanges, its 230 million equity shares, representing 3.4 percent stake in Motherson, for Rs16.12 billion (US$196m). The transaction was signed on 15 March 2023, and closed on 16 March 2023. Western region markets head partner Abhinav Kumar led the firm’s team in the transaction, while Ashurst acted as international counsel.

Dentons has represented Gaoyou City Construction Investment Development Group, a leading state-owned infrastructure construction company principally engaged in the construction of municipal infrastructure, water facilities, roads, environmental governance-related facilities

DEALS

and shantytown redevelopment projects in Gaoyou City and Suzhou City, on its global offering under Regulation S of its English law-governed €75 million (US$79.4m) 4.6 percent Credit Enhanced Bonds due 2026, with the benefit of an irrevocable Standby Letter of Credit issued by Bank of Jiangsu Yangzhou Branch, underwritten by China Industrial Securities International, Industrial Bank of Co Hong Kong Branch, Shanghai Pudong Development Bank Hong Kong Branch, China Minsheng Banking Corp Hong Kong Branch, CEB International, Guotai Junan International, Guosen Securities (HK), Central Wealth Securities Investment, CNCB Capital, CITIC Securities, CMBC Capital, China International Capital Corporation and Caitong International. Hong Kong capital markets partner Man Chiu Lee, senior partner Jianghong Xu and partner Dandan Wang led the firm’s team in the transaction.

DLA Piper Middle East has advised leading mobile telecommunications company Zain Group on its recent US45 $ million acquisition of BIOS Middle East Holdings, a leading provider of managed private cloud services headquartered in the UAE. The firm has further advised Zain Group on its recent joint venture with gaming start-up PLAYHERA. The joint venture, “PLAYHERA MENA”, is a Saudi Arabia-based next generation gaming tournament platform, which will target the region’s gaming market and help diversify Saudi Arabia’s economy as part of its Vision 2030. A pioneer in the telecom industry, Zain Group has a commercial footprint in seven Middle Eastern and African countries, and a workforce of over 7,500. Corporate (Middle East) head

partner Will Seivewright led the firm’s team in the transaction.

HHP Law Firm and Baker McKenzie have advised Indonesian nickel mining company Vale Indonesia on its proposed collaboration with battery minerals producer Zhejiang Huayou Cobalt and automaker Ford Motor to advance more sustainable nickel mining and refining in Indonesia. At a ceremony held on 30 March 2023 with Indonesia’s President Joko Widodo, the three companies entered into definitive agreements, pursuant to which equity investments will be made to develop the Pomalaa Block High-Pressure Acid Leaching (HPAL) Project. Subject to relevant approvals, the project could produce up to 120 kilotons per annum of mixed hydroxide precipitate (MHP), a lower-cost nickel product used in EV batteries. The entry into these agreements is the continuation

DEALS

of Vale Indonesia’s Pomalaa Block groundbreaking in November 2022. The project is a National Strategic Project with an estimated investment of up to Rp67.5 trillion (US$4.5b), and is expected to generate 12,000 construction jobs. Norman Bissett, Tanya Denning and Luke Devine led the firms’ team in the transaction.

IndusLaw has acted as Indian counsel to Takahata Precision Co and Takahata Precision Pte on their share purchase agreement and other definitive documents with SPR Engenious, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Shriram Pistons & Rings (SPR), on the divestment of 75 percent of their shareholding in Takahata Precision India to further expand Takahata India’s business by collaborating with SPR, following completion of this transaction, which has an adjusted enterprise value of Rs2.22 billion (US$27m). Partner Rohit Ambast, supported by senior corporate partner Saurav Kumar, led the firm’s team in the transaction, while Kitahama Partners, led by Tokyo partner Daisuke Sakai, acted as lead transaction counsel. Shriram Pistons & Rings was represented by Luthra and Luthra Law Offices India.

JSA has advised Mobiv Acquisition, a US-based special purpose acquisition company (SPAC) with a focus on electric vehicles, on the Indian aspects of entering into a definitive merger agreement with Srivaru Holdings, a company based out of Coimbatore, India and is one of the leading providers of premium electric motorcycles in India, the world’s largest and fastest-growing market for two-wheeled vehicles. Mobiv will combine with Srivaru to create a publicly-traded

company. The deal value, including the vehicle sales revenue-based earn-out for Srivaru shareholders of 25 million shares, which is also the implied total consideration to Srivaru shareholders, will be approximately US$409 million. Assuming no redemptions by Mobiv’s public stockholders, the transaction is anticipated to generate gross proceeds of up to approximately US$104 million in cash, which will be used to fund operations and growth. Partner Rupinder Malik, supported by partners Rajul Bohra and Kumarmanglam Vijay (direct tax practice head), led the firm’s team in the transaction, which is expected to result in the first US-listed electric motorcycle company with manufacturing facilities based in India.

Khaitan & Co has advised PerkinElmer on the India leg of the sale of its AES business assets to Spectralytic Scientific Solutions. PerkinElmer sold its Analytical & Enterprise Solutions business, along with the PerkinElmer brand (across multiple jurisdictions, including India) to leading global

DEALS

private equity fund New Mountain Capital at a valuation of up to US$2.45 billion. New Yorklisted PerkinElmer is a publicly traded corporation based in Waltham, Massachusetts, USA. It provides end-to-end solutions that help scientists, researchers and clinicians better diagnose disease and discover new and more personalized drugs. Its dedicated team of 11,000 collaborates closely with commercial, government, academic and healthcare customers to deliver reagents, assays, instruments, automation, informatics and strategic services that accelerate workflows, deliver actionable insights and support improved decision making. PerkinElmer’s AES Business includes its leading OneSource laboratory and field services, along with a portfolio of atomic spectroscopy, molecular spectroscopy and chromatography instruments, consumables and reagents that serve the biopharma, food, environmental and safety and applied end markets. Partner Ashraya Rao, supported by partners Anshul Prakash, Adheesh Nargolkar, Smriti Yadav, Harsh Parikh, Manavendra Mishra and Indruj Rai, led the firm’s team in the transaction.

Maples has also acted as Cayman Islands counsel to Modern Land (China) on the restructuring of its US1.34 $ billion bondholder debt. The complex, multi-jurisdictional transaction was achieved via a successful Cayman Islands scheme of arrangement and recognition proceedings in the US, under Chapter 15 of the US Bankruptcy Code. Hong Kong-listed Modern Land is a property developer focused on the development of green, energy-saving and eco-friendly residences in China. The restructuring was prompted by the ongoing distress in the

Chinese property markets, and focused on the company’s US$-denominated notes. Partners Nick Stern (Hong Kong) and Caroline Moran (Cayman Islands) led the firm’s team in the transaction, while Sidley Austin acted as international counsel, advising on Hong Kong and New York laws.

Rajah & Tann Singapore has acted as lead counsel to Temasek Holdings, as majority shareholder of Sembcorp Marine, and substantial shareholder of Keppel Corporation, on the landmark S$8.7 billion (US$6.5b) merger of Sembcorp Marine and Keppel Offshore & Marine to create sustainable value over the long term for two of the world’s leaders in global O&M engineering and energy sectors. The transaction created waves, not just in the offshore marine industry globally, but is also seen as an epic landmark

DEALS

transaction that underscores the city state’s commitment and drive towards promoting green growth, and its strategic pivot towards renewable and clean energy. The firm also acted for Temasek in a connected transaction involving the sale of Keppel Offshore & Marine’s legacy rigs and associated receivables to a new entity held by Baluran, Keppel and Temasek. Partners Sandy Foo, Hoon Chi Tern, Chua Choon King, Lee Xin Mei, Lim Chen Chen, Goh Jun Yi, Eugene Lee, Adzfar Alami and Dodo Lim led the firm’s team in the transaction.

S&R Associates has represented Embassy Office Parks REIT (Embassy REIT), India’s first listed real estate investment trust, and its manager, Embassy Office Parks Management Services, on the acquisition of Embassy Business Hub, an integrated business park in Bengaluru expected to comprise 2.1 million sq ft of leasable area upon completion, along with the associated business of common area maintenance services and common infrastructure services, for an enterprise value of approximately Rs3.35 billion (US$41m). The acquisition was completed through the purchase of equity shares of Embassy Construction (the developer of Embassy Business Hub) by Embassy REIT from certain affiliates of Embassy Property Developments, a sponsor of Embassy REIT. Partners Sandip Bhagat, Shivaji Bhattacharya and Pratichi Mishra led the firm’s team in the transaction.

Skadden is advising JX Nippon Mining & Metals on its definitive stock purchase agreement with Lundin Mining Corporation (LMC) to sell 51 percent of the issued and

outstanding equity of SCM Minera Lumina Copper Chile (Lumina Copper), a whollyowned subsidiary of JX which operates the Caserones copper-molybdenum mine in Chile, to LMC for approximately US$950 million. LMC will also have the right to acquire up to an additional 19 percent interest in Lumina Copper for US$350 million over a five-year period, commencing on the first anniversary of the date of closing. Partners Mitsuhiro Kamiya (Tokyocorporate), Joe Yaffe (Palo Alto and Los Angeles- executive compensation and benefits), Andrew Foster (Hong Kong- antitrust/competition), Anne Villanueva (Palo Alto- labour and employment), Nathan Giesselman (Palo Alto-tax) and Ken Kumayama (Palo Alto-intellectual property and technology) are leading the firm’s multijurisdictional team in the transaction.

DEALS

Simpson Thacher has represented SBI Sumishin Net Bank on its 49.8 ¥ billion (US 374 $m) global offering of shares, including an offering to institutional investors outside Japan, pursuant to Rule 144 A and Regulation S under the Securities Act. The shares in the international offering were existing shares sold by selling shareholders SBI Holdings and Sumitomo Mitsui Trust Bank. SBI Sumishin Net Bank is a leading internet bank in Japan offering digital banking services to consumers throughout Japan. The international joint lead managers for the international offering were Nomura International, SBI Securities (Hong Kong), Goldman Sachs International, Daiwa Capital Markets Europe and UBS London Branch. Partners Alan Cannon (Tokyo-capital markets) and Jonathan Cantor (New York-tax) led the firm’s team in the transaction.

non-banking finance companies that focuses on vehicle financing. This is the first overseas bond issuance undertaken by Shiram Finance, post the merger of Shriram City Union Finance with Shiram Finance, under the revised external commercial borrowing framework in India, which was revised pursuant to the circular dated 8 December 2021 notified by the Reserve Bank of India. Partners Richa Choudhary and Joseph Jimmy led the firm’s team in the transaction.

TT&A has advised Nomura Investments (Singapore) and Nomura Capital (India) , as the initial debenture holders, and Beacon Trusteeship , as the debenture trustee, on the issue and allotment of 2,080 senior, secured, redeemable, unrated, unlisted, non-convertible debentures with face value of Rs1 million (US$12,182) each issued by Della Adventure & Resorts, aggregating up to Rs2.08 billion (US$25.34m), on a private placement basis in two series, as per terms of the debenture trust deed dated 16 November 2022, entered into between Della Adventure & Resorts and Beacon Trusteeship. Partner Rituparno Bhattacharya led the firm’s team in the transaction.

Trilegal has advised Deutsche Bank

Singapore Branch and The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation , as the arrangers, on the update of up to US$350 billion global medium-term note programme, and US$150 million drawdown thereunder, by Shriram Finance, one of India’s largest

WongPartnership is acting for Ant Group , as lead investor, on the series seed funding round of Proxtera, a Singapore-based metahub platform for B2B businesses and SMEs. The funding will be used as working capital to further develop the company’s innovative digital cross-border trade and financial services enabled by trusted credentials. Partner Nicolette Lye is leading the firm’s team in the transaction.

Transforming Legal Practice with AI:

Opportunities and Challenges Ahead

CAITLIN VAN RENSBURG, EDITOR, IN-HOUSE COMMUNITY

As technology continues to advance, the legal industry remains no exception to its effects. Law firms are now turning to artificial intelligence (AI) to assist with tasks such as contract drafting, legal research, and even predicting case outcomes. While the use of AI in the legal field is still relatively new, it has already shown promising results in increasing efficiency and reducing costs. However, as with any new technology, there are also concerns about the potential risks and drawbacks.

Interestingly, this introductory paragraph (along with its cautious acknowledgement of AI risks) was not written by me at all,

but by ChatGPT – itself an AI chatbot tool developed by OpenAI and launched in late 2022. Its release, together with other natural language processing models like Google Bard and Bing AI, have dominated headlines by making generative AI widely accessible with exciting opportunities for application in fields such as law.

The use of AI in the legal profession is, of course, not new. For instance, it is reported that Shearman & Sterling have used a wide variety of AI tools, including Kira for due diligence, while White & Case is reported to use tools such as Brainspace and Relativity to assist with document review for discovery. However, this new wave of

innovative AI platforms represents a potentially steep upgrade on previous tools with widescale adoption predicted.

Indeed, hot on the heels of the ChatGPT release came Allen & Overy’s announcement in February 2023 of its global integration of “Harvey” - an AI platform founded by a team of former lawyers, entrepreneurs and engineers and built on a version of Open AI’s latest model, specially enhanced for legal work. This announcement came after a particularly short beta trial at A&O beginning in November 2022, although this time did allow for 40,000+ queries to be given by 3,500+ lawyers!

Harvey uses natural language processing, data analytics and machine learning to help generate insights, recommendations and predictions based on huge amounts of data with potential application in due diligence, litigation, contract analysis and regulatory compliance. A&O have, however, made quite clear that Harvey is but a tool for its lawyers, with all outputs to be carefully reviewed.

Not long after the announcement from A&O came word from PwC of its own 12-month

contract with Harvey to help speed up the contract and due diligence work of its 4,000 lawyers, with additional plans in the pipeline for use in its tax practice. PwC has further stated that it plans to create customised products for legal and tax clients using Harvey’s platform.

Some of the main benefits of using AI tools like ChatGPT and Harvey include helping lawyers save time and improve efficiency. Legal research is a time consuming and laborious process for the human mind, and AI tools like Harvey have the potential to assist lawyers in quickly analysing vast amounts of legal information to identify relevant case law, statutes and regulations. This could help lawyers make better-informed decisions and improve the quality of their work. Assistance such as this may prove particularly useful for smaller legal teams and solo practitioners previously at a disadvantage in legal research due to their limited access to extensive resources and teams of lawyers.

Despite the many benefits of using AI tools such as these, there are also potential

drawbacks to consider. One concern commonly voiced is that AI tools could replace human lawyers, leading to job losses in the legal industry. ChatGPT itself recently passed law exams in multiple courses at universities in the US (a laudable achievement, albeit only at the level of a C+ student).

However, while having the potential to make fundamental shifts to the ways lawyers spend their time, improve efficiency and reduce the amount of time spent on certain tasks, AI tools cannot (yet?) replace human judgment and legal expertise that lawyers bring to their work. As A&O has confirmed, Harvey is to them an innovative way of working rather than a “cost-cutting exercise”. As such, A&O state that Harvey will not replace any part of its workforce, reduce billable hours nor save money for the company or clients. PwC has echoed these sentiments.

Other concerns that have been levelled against the use of generative AI in the legal profession include its potential to “hallucinate” (state something convincingly as fact which is entirely made up) and whether such platforms will be given access to sensitive client data.

To limit concerns related to errors, A&O says that safeguards have been put in place at the model level for Harvey with all outputs still to be reviewed by qualified persons. On sharing client data, the law firm states that client confidentiality remains a key priority and that Harvey has, as a tool designed for the legal industry, multiple ways to ensure client confidentiality. It will, however, not interact with client data until A&O deems it safe to do so.

discrimination. They are, afterall, only as good as the data they are trained on and if that data is biased or discriminatory, then the AI tool may well perpetuate that bias. This may be of particular concern in the legal industry. Training lawyers to be aware and reflective on these issues may prove necessary.

Despite these concerns, the use of AI tools in the legal profession is growing rapidly and it will continue to do so, with the industry likely to see more firms and in-house legal teams adopting AI tools like Harvey in the future. This is especially true in Asia, where the legal industry is rapidly expanding, and the demand for legal services is ever-increasing.

There is no doubt that generative AI has an enormous potential to revolutionise the legal industry by streamlining processes, increasing efficiency, and reducing costs. However, as with any new technology, there are also potential risks and drawbacks. It will be crucial for law firms to weigh the benefits and challenges of using new-age generative AI and to implement appropriate safeguards to mitigate any risks.

It should also be kept in mind that AI tools could perpetuate bias and

Caitlin van Rensburg, Editor, IHC Magazine

An Exploration of Data Protection and Cybersecurity Developments in the Digital Economy Era:

In today’s digital age, data protection and cybersecurity are becoming increasingly important world over. The Asian legal landscape, being no exception, is ushering in an enormous amount of change – with privacy laws anticipated, by the end of this year, to have grown by 25% since 2021.

With the rise of technology, sensitive data is being collected and stored at an unprecedented rate, making it vulnerable to cyber-attacks. This is especially true in countries like China, India, Vietnam and Thailand that are experiencing rapid growth in their digital economies. Here, we shine a spotlight on these countries and explore the latest changes and upcoming amendments to their data protection and cybersecurity laws and regulations.

China

With the ever-accelerating growth of technology, comprehensive data protection and cybersecurity laws in China have become crucial. In recent years, the Chinese government has implemented a number of changes to its laws in order to protect citizens’ personal information and ensure that companies are compliant with international standards, such as the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). These changes include new regulations on data collection, storage, usage and cross-border data transfers; increased penalties for violations; and improved enforcement mechanisms.

How China, India, Vietnam and Thailand are keeping up with digital evolution

In 2021, China enacted its comprehensive data protection “rulebook”, the Personal Information Protection Law (PIPL) which, while neither as prescriptive nor as detailed as the GDPR, imposes strict requirements on companies that collect and use personal information, and gives individuals greater control over their own data. For example, under the PIPL, individuals have the right to request that companies delete their personal information, and companies must obtain consent from users before sharing their data with third parties.

Since the implementation of this law, authorities in China have endeavoured to develop the measures necessary to implement its provisions, such as those related to data breach notifications and cross-border data transfers.

In order to transfer personal information to a party outside of China, PIPL requires that one of three conditions be met by a “personal information handler” (similar to a “controller” under the GDPR):

1. That a security assessment be undertaken by the Cyberspace Administration of China (CAC) and passed;

2. That a contract in the standard form given by the CAC be concluded with the party outside of China; or

3. That a personal information protection certification by a specialised agency as per CAC requirements be conducted.

On 1 September 2022, implementing rules for such security assessments were effected, which are mandatory for certain transfers such as the export of personal information by a controller that processes the personal information of over one million individuals; or the export of deemed “important data” by a controller which through falsification, destruction, leakage, or illegal obtaining or use may endanger inter alia national security, economic activity, social stability or public health.

On 24 February 2023, the CAC released the final form of the Personal Information Export Standard Contract (the standard contract above, similar to that under GDPR) together with Measures on the Standard Contract, which will both take effect on 1 June 2023. Final form specifications for security certifications were released by the National Information Security Standardisation Technical Committee in June 2022 with further revisions released in December 2022.

With regards to potential security breaches, controllers must, under PIPL, take remedial action without delay and notify the CAC and affected individuals in the event of a falsification, breach or loss of personal information. There is a caveat, however, where harm caused by the breach can be effectively avoided by measures taken by the controller. In this instance, notice to individuals may not be required but the CAC retains the right to require notice in any event should it believe the breach may still result in harm.

provisions in China’s PIPL and Data Security Law (DSL). These prohibit providing PRC data to foreign criminal or judicial authorities, except through international treaty mechanisms.

“In the case of the PIPL, non-compliance can potentially subject companies to significant penalties. Even the most compliant international companies transfer data between offices in the ordinary course, for example through internal emails or shared systems. Once data is transferred, it is located abroad.

“Companies facing judicial or regulatory inquires abroad will need to determine what relevant data is in China and what is stored outside of China at the time of the foreign request. Only after determining where the potentially relevant data is, can companies determine how best to negotiate with the foreign authority and navigate any conflicts between PRC and foreign law,” Johnson and Rohlik explain.

New regulatory landscape such as this may prove minefield territory, even for the most astute businesses. Mark Johnson, Partner, and Philip Rohlik, Counsel, of Debevoise & Plimpton LLP’s Hong Kong and Shanghai offices, respectively, highlight one key change that companies in Asia should be aware of:

“International companies doing business in China need to be aware of the blocking

Indeed, penalties in this realm can be significant. The CAC in 2022 proved that China’s data

International companies doing business in China need to be aware of the blocking provisions in China’s PIPL and Data Security Law (DSL)

Mark Johnson, Partner, Debevoise & Plimpton - Hong Kong

Philip Rohlik, Counsel, Debevoise & Plimpton - Shanghai

protection laws are no mere lip service when it fined a leading mobile ride-hailing platform, DiDi Global Inc., RMB 8.000.000.000 (approx. US$1.2 billion) for violations of China’s PIPL, Cyber Security Law and DSL (with additional individual fines being levied for the chairperson and CEO).

Through its excessive collection of user’s personal information, DiDi was found to have been engaged in “despicable” data abuses as it disregarded national cyber and data security, posing serious risks and hidden dangers thereto. A few of its transgressions included the illegal and excessive collection of personal information from users (such as 107 million pieces of passenger facial recognition information and 167 million pieces of precise location information) and failure to accurately and clearly explain the purposes of such collection.

India

India has also been taking steps to strengthen its data protection and cybersecurity laws in recent years, although it has not been an easy stroll. In 2019, India passed the comprehensive Personal Data Protection Bill (PDPB) which aimed to establish a comprehensive framework for data protection in India, and would require companies to obtain consent from users before collecting and using their personal information.

On 3 August 2022, however, India withdrew the beleaguered Bill which had already seen over 80 amendments and 12 recommendations after consideration by the Indian Parliament. The withdrawn Bill raised concerns over the management of sensitive information and the scope of access to data by the Indian Government.

A scaled back and less prescriptive proposal, the Digital Personal Data Protection Bill (DPDP) was later published on 18 November 2022. It is expected to include a similar framework for data protection (largely in line with GDPR) for legislative approval with detail to be given in further implementing regulations.

Notable changes from the previous version of the bill include amendments to penalties for non-compliance and the removal of the contentious data localisation requirements found in the PDPB

The DPDP, in its current form, would add to the growing body of privacy laws in the region that apply extraterritorially. It includes extraterritorial application to entities processing information outside of India should this involve the profiling of data subjects in India or the offering of goods and services in India.

Notable changes from the previous version of the bill include amendments to penalties for non-compliance and the removal of the contentious data localisation requirements found in the PDPB.

Under the PDPB, companies that failed to comply with its strict requirements could face fines of up to 4% of their global revenue. The DPDP, however, caps fines to be levied against a data fiduciary to approximately US$62 million.

With regards to localisation, rather than requiring entities to store collected data in India, the revised Bills provides for Government to rather assess the data protection regimes of different countries and thereby confirm whether transfer to such countries is allowable.

After being subject to public consultation until early January of this year, the DPDP will now undergo the same legislative process of its unsuccessful predecessor, hopefully with more successful ends. Given the Bill’s framework approach with a focus on core privacy requirements similar to most privacy laws globally, it may be in for a smoother ride.

Moving now to Southeast Asia where 2022 proved a milestone year for cybersecurity and data privacy law developments.

Vietnam

Vietnam, considered one of the fastest growing digital economies in Southeast Asia, has been focusing on strengthening its data protection and cybersecurity regulations in recent years.

Indicative of this commitment, the government launched its National Digital Transformation Program by 2025, with an

orientation to 2030, which includes a range of initiatives aimed at promoting the digitalisation of business, administration and production activities to improve efficiency and competitiveness.

Data protection and security provisions have, until now, been particularly fragmented in the country, with applicable provisions located in numerous laws and decrees. We spoke with Waewpen Piemwichai and Trung Bao Tran of Tilleke & Gibbins about Vietnamese data protection laws and they state that big changes are, however, starting to take shape:

Waewpen Piemwichai, Senior Associate, Tilleke & Gibbins - Hanoi

“There has been a major overhaul of Vietnam’s data protection laws, notably with the development since 2021 of the landmark Personal Data Protection Decree (PDPD) by the Ministry of Public Security. This Decree, once in effect, will be the very first comprehensive regulation on data protection in Vietnam.”

The PDPD was recently issued on 17 April 2023, following extensive public consultations and numerous rounds of reviews since

its first release in draft form in February 2021. It is set to take effect on 1 July 2023 without a transitional period.

In a recently released article on the subject from Tilleke & Gibbins, Piemwichai and Tran report that the PDPD sets out significantly new requirements on the processing of personal data, the most critical provisions of which include:

• Eight principles for the processing of personal data, being lawfulness; transparency; purpose limitation; data minimisation; accuracy; integrity, confidentiality and security; storage limitation; and accountability.

• New definitions and concepts, particularly including personal data; sensitive data; data subject, data controller, data processor, and data controller-processor; third parties; and cross-border transfer of personal data.

Trung Bao Tran, Associate, Tilleke & GibbinsHo Chi Minh City

• Eleven data subject rights, including the rights to know, to consent, to withdraw consent, to access, to delete data, to restrict data processing, to object to data processing, to request the provision of data, to claim compensation for damage, to self-defence, and to complain, denounce and initiate lawsuits.

• Conditions for cross-border transfer of personal data, including a transfer impact assessment and post-transfer notification to be sent to the Department of Cyber Security and Hi-Tech Crime Prevention of the Ministry of Public Security.

• Processing of children’s personal data.

• Cases where personal data can be processed without consent.

• Measures to protect personal data in general, basic personal data and sensitive personal data, the latter of which includes assigning a data protection officer.

Piemwichai and Tran predict far-reaching implications across virtually all business operations in Vietnam. When asked about key areas of data protection laws in Vietnam that in-house counsel in Asia should be aware of to remain compliant, they gave this advice:

“The PDPD proposes a great number of requirements that do not exist in current laws. It is quite easy for companies to omit these new rules (or some details of them) since they have never had a compliance mechanism in place. Some critical new rules include:

• The principle of data minimisation (proportionality), according to which personal data collected must be limited to only what is necessary to accomplish the specified purposes.

• The new GDPR-like concepts of “data controller” and “data processor” that define responsibilities of participants in a data processing operation more clearly.

The Draft PDPD has proposes a great number of requirements that do not exist in current laws. It is quite easy for companies to omit these potential new rules since they have never had a compliance mechanism in place

• Consent for personal data processing must be expressed in writing with a printable and reproducible format. Silence by data subjects is completely ruled out as a valid form of consent. Other conditions of consent include that it can be made partially and conditionally, and withdrawn at any time by the data subject.

• A privacy notice with mandatory details about the data processing operations must be sent to the data subject.

• There are a number of instances where the processing is exempted from consent, but must satisfy other lawful processing bases.”

To best prepare for compliance, Piemwichai and Tran recommend that companies start a thorough review of the now issued PDPD, compiling a checklist of all regulatory requirements, and performing a comprehensive compliance gap analysis.

With the ongoing evolution of technologies such as artificial intelligence, we further asked Piemwichai and Tran whether they anticipate any additional development of data protection laws in Vietnam in relation to these technologies in the coming years.

“The implication these new technologies may have on data privacy has not yet become an alarming issue in Vietnam,” they reassured. “At this stage, Vietnam is focusing on the development of fundamental

privacy rules under the PDPD to deal with more rampant violations like unauthorised data collection and processing, and illegal data trading.”

They do note, however, “that the Ministry of Public Security has a plan to develop a Personal Data Protection Law in 2025. Privacy issues relating to the use of new technologies may be taken into account in the preparation of this law if they become a critical concern by then.”

Thailand

Privacy laws in Thailand are growing stronger with the Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA) coming into full effect on 1 June 2022 together

with the subsequent introduction of multiple guidelines.

The PDPA is the first comprehensive data protection regulation in Thailand and is similarly highly influenced by the GDPR in its key principles. With extraterritorial applicability, it covers entities collecting personal data outside of Thailand if this processing involves the offering of goods and services in Thailand.

Guidelines have included the Guideline on Requesting Consent from the Data Subject under the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019), released on 7 September 2022, which delineates requirements for obtaining valid consent from individuals; and the Guideline on Procedures for Notifying the Purpose and Details relating to the Collection of Personal

Data from Data Subjects which outlines the principles for providing notice to a data subject regarding how their personal data will be processed.

The Office of Personal Data Protection Committee (OPDPC) undertook a public hearing in 2022 which ran until 24 October regarding its draft notification to supplement the PDPA on cross-border transfers of personal data outside of Thailand. It adopts the GDPR approach and lays out requirements regarding binding corporate rules and other safeguard measures.

Just before the rolling around of 2023, on 15 December 2022, the Notification of the Personal Data Protection Committee Re: Criteria and Means on Personal Data Breach Notification was published and took immediate effect. This notification provides more expansive details on the obligations of key data controllers concerning notifications of personal data breaches, building upon the PDPA’s requirements. This includes details on what to notify for, what to do (e.g. to first inspect and assess the level of risk, to notify the OPDPC without delay and within 72 hours, and to notify the data subject if the risk is high). It also covers required minimum details to be notified (including descriptions, impacts, mitigating measures and contact details).

Data controllers have been given concessions to continue processing personal data collected before 1 June 2022 should the purpose for which the data was collected remain the same, however, they must publicise a method for consent withdrawal and notify data subjects of this option to opt-out. Beyond this, data handlers had best familiarise themselves with the updated provisions as penalties for failure to comply may incur civil liabilities, criminal penalties (including imprisonment) or administrative fines.

Regarding cybersecurity, Thailand’s National Cyber Security Agency plans to expand the enforcement of its standard framework of security requirements. By the end of 2023, 120 organisations stipulated by the Cybersecurity Act (up from 60) will be required to comply with the framework.

Change the only constant?

Data privacy and cybersecurity laws and regulations globally are constantly evolving, as illustrated in this exploration of recent developments in China, India, Vietnam and Thailand. Some common threads emerge as many countries follow in GDPR footsteps with other similarities, such as localisation and extraterritorial applicability, emerging as regional trends.

This article did, of course, tour only 4 jurisdictions. Change is rife elsewhere, too. Just at the end of March, the Saudi Arabia Council of Ministers approved a series of changes to the Kingdom’s own Personal Data Protection Law (issued in 2021). While pushing the effective date of this law out to September 2023, these changes also align the law more closely with GDPR and international standards.

As the digital economy continues to grow, it is essential for businesses to stay up-to-date with latest developments in data privacy and cybersecurity laws to ensure not only that their data is secure but that they avoid penalties by remaining compliant with the ever-growing web of international regulation.

Cross-Border Data Transfer in Indonesia –Present and Future

After almost a decade of discussion, Indonesia finally passed its personal data protection law in September 2022. Law No. 27 of 2022 dated 17 October 2022, regarding Personal Data Protection (PDP Law) becomes Indonesia’s umbrella regulation for personal data protection, both in electronic and non-electronic form. The PDP Law also applies extraterritorially to any personal data processing that has an impact in Indonesia and/or affects Indonesian citizens outside of Indonesia’s jurisdiction.

Consisting of 16 chapters and 76 articles, the PDP Law regulates the main principles of personal data protection, the rights of

personal data subjects, and the obligations of Personal Data Controllers (Data Controller) and Personal Data Processors (Data Processor). It also regulates sanctions (administrative and criminal) for violations of the law.

Before the PDP Law was in place, personal data protection in Indonesia was regulated under several different regulations, including Government Regulation No. 71 of 2019 dated 10 October 2019, regarding the Organization of Electronic Systems and Transactions, and Minister of Communication and Informatics Regulation No. 20 of 2016 dated 1 December 2016, regarding Personal Data Protection in Electronic Systems (MOCI Reg. 20/2016), which mainly concerns the protection of

DENNY RAHMANSYAH AND AGUNG KURNIAWAN SIHOMBING

personal data in electronic systems. As per Article 75 of the PDP Law, these regulations are still in force to the extent that the provisions therein are not contrary to the PDP Law.

Despite being a comprehensive regulation, most of the provisions of the PDP Law require implementing regulations to be fully implemented. The PDP Law provides a two-year transitional period, beginning 17 October 2022, for Data Controllers, Data Processors, and other parties involved in data processing activities to adjust their data processing practices to the requirements under the PDP Law.

One of the provisions in the new law that lacks clarity concerns cross-border data transfers, an issue of great importance in the digital age. Noting the lack of clarity in the PDP Law, this article will provide a brief overview of the current practice applicable under MOCI Reg. 20/2016 and offer a comparison with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) of the European Union (EU), which was referred to heavily during the drafting of the PDP Law.

PERSONAL DATA UNDER THE PDP LAW

Article 1(1) of the PDP Law defines “personal data” as data regarding individuals who are identified or can be identified separately or in combination with other information, either directly or indirectly through an electronic or non-electronic system. Personal data is further divided into specific and general personal data.

Specific personal data is personal data which, in its processing, may create a bigger impact on the data subject, such as discriminatory acts and other greater losses to the data subject. Specific personal data includes (i) data and information regarding health; (ii) biometric data; (iii) genetic data; (iv) criminal records; (v) children’s data; (vi) personal

financial data; and/or (vii) other data in accordance with the relevant laws and regulations.

General personal data includes (i) full name; (ii) gender; (iii) nationality; (iv) religion; (v) marital status; and/or (vi) personal data combined to identify a person.

The PDP Law has yet to provide specific guidance on how one should treat specific personal data differently from general personal data.

CROSS-BORDER DATA TRANSFER UNDER MOCI REG. 20/2016

Before the PDP Law, MOCI Reg. 20/2016 was the main regulation used as a reference for the protection of personal data in Indonesia. In terms of cross-border data transfers, the requirement for such transfers under MOCI Reg. 20/2016 is the data subject’s consent and coordination with the MOCI.

Article 22 of MOCI Reg. 20/2016 requires companies that operate an electronic system (Electronic System Provider or ESP) to coordinate with the MOCI before and after a crossborder data transfer.

Such coordination is accomplished by completing a designated form with information including the name of the ESP and the recipient of the transferred data; the personal data being transferred; the purpose of the transfer; and the transfer destination. This form is then submitted to the MOCI through a specific MOCI email address.

Prior to the PDP Law, the terms “Data Controller” and “Data Processor” were not explicitly recognised by the relevant regulations. Nonetheless, under the unwritten policy of the MOCI, the party that should comply with the coordination requirement is the Indonesian ESP that acts as a Data Controller.

If personal data transfer is conducted on a regular basis, e.g. multiple transfers hourly, daily, weekly, etc., the MOCI notification may be provided once, at the beginning, assuming that the notification indicates that the transfer shall be conducted on the appropriate routine basis. Then going forward, a report recording all such cross-border transfers should be provided to the MOCI on an annual basis for the preceding 12-month period.

Article 22 of MOCI Reg. 20/2016 requires companies that operate an electronic system (Electronic System Provider or ESP) to coordinate with the MOCI before and after a cross-border data transfer

In addition to the above requirements, there may be additional obligations related to crossborder data transfers under sectoral regulations, e.g. financial sector regulations.

In practice, however, the coordination requirement with the MOCI is rarely implemented because it relies heavily on the ESP’s awareness of the requirement and its willingness to comply.

CROSS-BORDER DATA TRANSFER UNDER THE PDP LAW

Under the PDP Law, “Data Controller” is defined as any person, public entity, or international organisation acting individually or jointly in determining the objectives and exercising control over the processing of personal data. “Data Processor” is defined as any person, public entity, or international organisation acting individually or jointly to process personal data on behalf of the Data Controller.

The PDP Law defines “transfer” as the displacement, delivery, and/or duplication

of personal data both electronically and non-electronically from the Data Controller to another party.

Article 56 of the PDP Law allows Data Controllers to transfer personal data to other Data Controllers and/or Data Processors outside the jurisdiction of the Republic of Indonesia. In conducting a cross-border personal data transfer, the Data Controller is obligated to ensure any of the following:

a. the jurisdiction where the recipient is located must have an equivalent or higher data protection standard than the PDP Law;

b. there is adequate and binding personal data protection; or

c. the valid consent of the data subject for the transfer has been obtained.

A Data Processor is also allowed to transfer personal data to another Data Processor (onward transfer), provided that such transfer is approved by the Data Controller. If the Data Controller fails to fulfill one of the above obligations under Article 56 of the PDP Law, it may be subject to administrative sanctions, including written warning, temporary suspension of personal data processing activities, deletion or destruction of personal data, and/ or administrative fines.

Further provisions on these requirements are expected to be regulated in an implementing regulation, i.e. a Government Regulation. Until such implementing regulation is enacted, there are unanswered questions on the fulfillment of the obligations under Article 56 of the PDP Law and the procedure to demonstrate such compliance.

COMPARISON WITH THE GDPR

The requirements for cross-border data transfer under the PDP Law are similar to

the requirements under the GDPR. Under the GDPR, cross-border data transfer may be allowed if the jurisdiction in which the recipient is located is deemed to provide an adequate level of data protection based on the adequacy decision; the data exporter puts in place appropriate safeguards; or a derogation or exemption applies.

The EU Commissioner provides a list of countries that are considered to have adequate protection, which means that data transfers to these countries will not require any specific authorisation. If the recipient country is not included in the list, EU member states must ensure that the recipient country has in place appropriate safeguards, which will also be subject to each state’s authorisation of a Data Protection Authority (DPA). This includes the existence of binding agreements between public authorities. In the absence of the first two requirements, i.e. adequacy decision and appropriate safeguards, certain derogations, including by way of the consent of the data subject, may be used as the basis to conduct the cross-border data transfer.

It remains unseen whether the PDP Law will adopt a similar approach as the GDPR. Absent implementing regulations, it seems that crossborder data transfers from Indonesia can only be conducted based on the consent of the data subject.

It is also noteworthy that Indonesia has yet to establish a DPA, which is expected to be the authority supervising the implementation of cross-border data transfers under the PDP Law. Based on Article 58 of the PDP Law, the formulation of the DPA will be further established by virtue of a Presidential Regulation.

CLOSING REMARKS

With the rapid development of technology, the PDP Law is necessary to protect personal

data. It not only helps ensure the rights of data subjects over their personal data, but it may also increase the confidence of offshore business actors in doing business with Indonesian companies due to an improved framework for personal data protection.

However, the PDP Law requires further implementing regulations and guidance to be implemented fully and provide the intended level of protection. This is especially true with the requirements for conducting cross-border data transfers.

Until the necessary implementing regulations are in place and the DPA established, the current practice for cross-border data transfers will remain in force, subject to the coordination requirement with the MOCI as regulated under MOCI Reg. 20/2016, which enforcement is lacking supervisory power.

Denny is an extensively experienced lawyer who joined SSEK in 2001. He has been involved in major projects and transactions in various sectors, including TMT (fintech/e-commerce, cryptocurrency, data protection/privacy).

+62 21 2953 2000

dennyrahmansyah@ssek.com

Agung works on corporate transactions, privacy matters, and projects and transactions in the ecommerce, payment systems, financial services, environment, employment, and immigration sectors.

+62 21 2953 2000

agungsihombing@ssek.com

Denny Rahmansyah, Partner

Agung Kurniawan Sihombing, Associate

Data Privacy & Protection: What Boards Should Ask

Boards face mounting pressure to oversee data privacy for their organisations. Shareholders and various stakeholders are increasingly holding boards accountable for the business’ data privacy strategy and the risks that go alongside it.

But what exactly is the oversight function of the board when it comes to these issues? In this article, we discuss:

• factors that are shaping the data privacy and protection environment for businesses as of today

• important questions boards should ask for appropriate risk oversight

FACTORS REDEFINING DATA PRIVACY AND PROTECTION STRATEGIES FOR COMPANIES TODAY

1. GREATER PRIVACY REGULATIONS

With the rise of data proliferation, state, national or regional privacy laws have come into strong effect in recent years. Most have sweeping implications for the way data should be processed, handled, and protected. Three of the most discussed laws are the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Brazil’s Lei Geral de Proteção de Dados (LGPD), and the California Consumer Privacy Act 2018 (CCPA).

PRAXONOMY DELIVERS THE FOLLOWING INSIGHTS

Let’s take a look at what these laws call for.

(Note: The following information is by no means a complete and comprehensive discussion of the privacy laws. It merely highlights their significant components and should not be used as basis for legal advice.)

A. European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)

GDPR came into effect in May 2018 and is arguably the most expansive piece of regulation for data privacy and protection in the world. GDPR not only applies to businesses in the European Union but also to any company “doing business” in the region. “Doing business” is to be interpreted loosely.

The law focuses on major aspects such as:

1. Protecting consumer data rights

• The right of individuals to access their personal data

• The right of individuals to request erasure of their data

• The right to data correction (or the right to data rectification)

• The right to data portability (which is essentially the right to receive the personal data concerning him or her in a “structured, commonly used and machine-readable format and have the right to transmit those data to another controller without hindrance from the controller”)

• The right to object to data processing

2. Responsibilities for ‘data controllers’ and ‘data processors’

• Companies must notify authorities of data breaches

• Act in accordance with the ‘principles of data notification’ such as gaining consent to disclosure and use of data

3. Penalties for non-compliance

• Fines can be up to €20 million or 4% of global revenue for the preceding financial year (whichever is higher)

B. Brazil’s Lei Geral de Proteção de Dados (LGPD)

LGPD came into effect in 2020. It is the first data privacy law in South America. Similar to GDPR, it applies to any data processing that takes place in the country, for the purposes of offering goods and services for people who are located in Brazil. The organisation also does not have to have a physical presence in the country or maintain its headquarters there. This extraterritoriality component is common to other international privacy laws such as GDPR.

Other important aspects of the law cover:

1. Protecting consumer data rights

• The right to confirmation of the existence of the processing

• The right to access the data

• The right to correct incomplete, inaccurate or out-of-date data

• The right to anonymise, block, or delete unnecessary or excessive data or data that is not being processed in compliance with the LGPD

• The right to the portability of data to another service or product provider

• The right to delete personal data processed with the consent of the data subject

• The right to information about public and private entities with which the controller has shared data

• The right to revoke consent

2. Penalties for non-compliance

• Fines can reach up to 2% of the organisation’s revenue, with a limit of 50 million Reals (estimated $10 million USD) per violation.

C. The California Consumer Privacy Act 2018 (CCPA)

The CCPA came into effect in January 2020. Like the GDPR and LGPD, it applies to any company that does business in California, regardless of whether a physical location is established there. It is important to note that this doesn’t apply to all businesses. It is relevant to only those that:

1. Have gross revenues of US$25 million or more in a year, or

2. Companies that hold personal information of 50,000 or more customers, devices, or households

3. Earn more than half their revenue from selling personal information

Some other important things to note about the CCPA is its focus on consumer rights as well:

• The right to ‘opt-out’ of having personal information sold

• The right to have personal information deleted

As for penalties, the CCPA calls for maximum civil penalties of $7,500 for intentional violations (and $2500 for unintentional violations) brought by the State of California through the Attorney General’s Office.

In a nutshell, businesses need to be mindful of the privacy and data protection laws that apply in the jurisdictions they operate in. These can have a significant impact on the organisation from a compliance and risk standpoint.

2. CONSUMER CONTROL AND POWER

As evidenced by the laws above, consumers have been given more control over the use of their data. This has redefined data privacy and protection strategies for many businesses, especially by those organisations who profit

In a nutshell, businesses need to be mindful of the privacy and data protection laws that apply in the jurisdictions they operate in

off data. Consumers can decide how companies can use their data, or if they’re allowed to at all. Should companies overlook and mismanage this, they expose themselves to financial risks and penalties.

3. SUPPLY CHAIN AND THIRDPARTY PROVIDERS

More companies are using more vendors. It is critical for the organisation’s supply chain/ third-party providers to meet the same privacy standards and data maintenance policies of the company. As one article states, “processes can be outsourced, but not the risks.” In the event of a data breach, stakeholders will ultimately look to the contracting organisation to shoulder the responsibility. In short, data protection and privacy laws need to be observed by the company’s supply chain network as well. Vendor risk management should be assessed and applied.

QUESTIONS BOARDS SHOULD ASK

Boards have to ask the hard questions when it involves data privacy and protection. To do so, they need to look at this responsibility from at least two different lenses: compliance and ethics.

A. The Compliance Questions

On the area of compliance, boards should be able to obtain answers to the following questions from management:

1. How is the organisation dealing with the different standards that exist

regionally, state-wide, or nationally, as the case may be?

2. How is it dealing with applicable privacy laws that might go into effect in the future?

3. How effective are the company’s compliance processes in meeting current data privacy regulations?

4. Are we allocating enough resources to support compliance programs?

5. How can the organisation be proactive in data privacy and protection oversight?

Takeaway:

The reality is that it is not impossible to be proactive when it comes to data privacy regulations. Most privacy laws are built upon common principles that can be applied against a consistent framework (e.g. customer consent, customer rights to own data, accessibility to data, etc.). With this established, companies can focus on and support compliance programs and approaches, and work towards flexibility for future regulations.

B. The Ethical Questions

It can be difficult to discuss data privacy and protection strategies from an ethical perspective. But it can’t be removed from the conversation, especially as more and more companies seek to monetise data. It is therefore important for the board to help draw ethical lines and boundaries around a company’s data strategy, and ensure the incorporation of data ethics controls into the marketing, research, and product functions of the organisation. There is a lot at risk there, and the inappropriate use of data can be disastrous for the company.

The boards should ask the following:

1. How is the organisation using and maintaining data while in compliance with privacy laws?

2. How does that align with the company’s corporate strategy?

3. How is the organisation making data security a priority?

4. What are its “responsible” privacy policies?

5. What policies and controls are in place to prevent improper use of sensitive data?

Takeaway:

It begins at the top. Boards should emphasise the importance of data privacy and protection strategies for their organisations. Board members must also understand the intent behind data collected, the data they need, and as well as how they go about obtaining it. They need to be updated as these change, in order to help determine whether there are ethical red flags around it.

While non-compliance issues present obvious risks to the company, the ethical repercussions can be less straightforward (e.g. diminished brand equity, breach of trust, etc.), but equally significant.

CONCLUSION

Boards must have a solid grasp and understanding of the risks the organisation assumes in relation to its business’ data strategies.

But the bigger message is this: companies are stewards of data. Boards must recognise this. They have a responsibility and growing societal obligation to ensure that their organisations comply with applicable privacy and protection laws, while assuring stakeholders that data is protected from irresponsible use. They must be involved. The stakes are too high to be trivialised and overlooked.

Praxonomy are the creators of Boardlogic, a highly-secure, easy-to-use board-level collaboration and governance solution. For more, please contact: tim@praxonomy.com

Getting to know…

Peter Godwin of Herbert Smith Freehills, Malaysia

Q&A with Peter Godwin: On leading an auspicious career, being open to opportunities and embracing diversity

YOU HAVE LED AN ILLUSTRIOUS CAREER, SPANNING MANY DECADES AND COUNTRIES ACROSS ASIA. CAN YOU TELL US A LITTLE ABOUT THIS JOURNEY IN THE LEGAL INDUSTRY AND WHERE YOU ARE NOW?

My career in law started as a consequence of a teacher at school, knowing that maths was my real strength, suggesting that if I was thinking of a career in Accountancy (I was), I should do something else at University. His suggestion was law. That is what I did and, partly because I enjoyed the intellectual stimulation of law and partly no doubt because my friends on the course were doing so, I found myself applying for a training contract and so stepped onto the legal conveyor belt. After 6 years practising in London, I decided it was time for a change so I headed to Hong Kong (where I had spent six months as a trainee). The plan was to do 2-3 years there and then head home. However, best laid plans…. My stint in Hong Kong happened to coincide with a period of Asia expansion for the firm, with us opening offices in Jakarta and Bangkok. Then, just as I was thinking of returning home, the firm opened in Tokyo and I was asked to transfer as a then Senior Associate to establish our disputes practice. At the time

I had never been to Japan, even for a holiday, so I went to see the place and made the mistake of taking my then 3 year old son to Disney for the day. Over dinner that evening he made it very clear we were moving! So I signed up for two years and clearly made the mistake of being rather too successful as I ended up staying for nearly 17 years. Having started from scratch, I was quickly promoted to partner. When I left, I was leading a five partner arbitration practice (the largest team in the global firm at the time) and I was widely recognised as the person who had created the international arbitration market in Japan. When I did leave Japan in 2017, it was to try to repeat this trick in Malaysia where the firm had decided to establish its latest Asian office. As of today, this is a work in progress and a challenge I am very much enjoying.

AS A LEADING FIGURE IN DISPUTE RESOLUTION, YOU HAVE BEEN WIDELY RECOGNISED BY THE LIKES OF CHAMBERS AND LEGAL 500. CAN YOU SHARE A FEW OF YOUR CAREER HIGHLIGHTS?

From a disputes perspective, the biggest buzz is always from winning one’s cases. In this regard, my career highlight was probably the last big case I did in Japan. My client was accused of being in material breach of contract and, as a consequence, a high value long term distribution agreement was terminated. I had not previously acted for this particular client so when this termination notice arrived and I was summonsed to speak urgently with the client’s CEO it was a tense moment. I recall advising him that I did not consider the notice to be valid and that, based on what had been explained to me at that stage, I saw no basis to allege material breach. A few months later we commenced arbitration alleging wrongful termination. The arbitration was hard fought, culminating some two years later in a two week hearing. When the award arrived, I was delighted to read that

the tribunal had made 17 findings of fact, all in favour of my client and that they had concluded by saying that not only did they find no evidence of my client being in material breach but they found no evidence of it being in breach of contract at all. Consequently my client was awarded in excess of US$200 million in damages and all of its costs. A very satisfactory outcome and a very happy client who remains a good client of the firm to this day.

Aside from the case wins, the most satisfying element of my career has always been helping other lawyers achieve their potential. I see many law firm partners who appear to measure their own success by their own achievements. I have always taken a different approach. I have always believed in building a team who are better than I am and helping them to reach their potential. Hence I take far more satisfaction from the people I have helped get promoted to partner either at my firm or elsewhere or indeed who I have helped succeed find challenging in-house roles.

ANY LOWLIGHTS THAT PROVED CHARACTER BUILDING?

The lowlights have generally not been case related but more management related. When you do your degree and then go to law school, no one tells you that the day you become a partner, your life will be much less about law and far more about people management. Very few have been trained to do this so it is a sink or swim environment. My first significant management role at the firm was when I was appointed Managing Partner of the Tokyo office. Just six months later came the major earthquake in March 2011 and the associated nuclear disaster at Fukushima. This was a baptism of fire. Having survived the 10 days of chaos that followed, looking back, they probably taught me more about human nature and the art of people management than anything else in my career.

WHAT IS A CHANGE YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE IN THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION LANDSCAPE IN ASIA AND/OR INTERNATIONALLY?

There is a lot of talk about how the costs involved in international arbitration have escalated to such an extent that we should perhaps be looking for new alternatives to resolve cross-border disputes. Yet when you go to any introductory seminar on international arbitration and hear anyone talk about the advantages of arbitration, almost without fail, one of the quoted advantages is the flexibility one has to design a process bespoke for the dispute in question. Yet how many times do you see that actually happen. The answer is very few. So I would like to see those of us sitting as arbitrators really challenge the Parties at the very first procedural hearing to think about what does that specific case need. If done well, I am convinced many of the complaints made about arbitration can be addressed. This is predominantly an issue for the legal profession. If we lead, our clients will follow (and possibly even be grateful)

WHAT PART DO YOU BELIEVE TECHNOLOGIES SUCH AS AI MAY PLAY IN DISPUTE RESOLUTION GOING FORWARD?

AI has been playing as significant role in dispute resolution for a number of years already, especially in the field of document review. As systems develop further, no doubt AI will continue to play a role whether that be in case analysis, helping to more accurately estimate costs, predicting outcomes, etc., remains to be seen. The one thing that is certain is the practice of law will continue to change. I believe there has been more change in the past 5 years than in the previous 25 years and the pace of change is only likely to continue to accelerate. That said, do I think the likes of ChatGPT will ultimately spell the end of the profession as we know it? No. Am I right? Time will tell.

WITH A LONG HISTORY IN PRIVATE PRACTICE, WHAT CAN YOU TELL US ABOUT DEVELOPMENTS IN THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN INHOUSE AND PRIVATE PRACTICE LAWYERS, IF ANY?

This relationship differs markedly across jurisdictions. Ultimately all inhouse functions are on a journey. In the UK/US (and a few others) in-house teams are now highly sophisticated; they are increasingly finding better ways to get the low level routine work done so they can focus on adding real value to their businesses. This is often reflected by the fact the GC has a seat at the Board table. In other jurisdictions, in-house teams are still seen as a necessary but evil cost, who are often blockers to what the business wants to do and/or who are there to review NDAs and the like but add very little true value. Everyone else is on the spectrum in between these. In my view, the best private practice lawyers and the best general counsel are those who have taken the time to build genuine relationships and effectively then act as business partners rather than in the more traditional client-service provide capacity. By building such a relationship one can brainstorm issues without the fear of suddenly receiving an unexpected bill or the like. The more open dialogue there is, the more likely you are to find the best solution. Business is often complex and the law is especially so. If it were not, you would just need Chat GPT!

WHAT IS ON YOUR LEGAL AND PERSONAL HORIZONS?

In English headquartered law firm terms (US firms value us more elderly folk more!), I am reaching the twilight of my career and am already transitioning into more roles sitting as arbitrator, rather than acting solely as counsel. I am fortunate that later this year I have a three month sabbatical which I will spend travelling partly in Europe (Rugby World Cup and Ryder Cup) and partly in Kenya

(safari). I will use that time to reflect on the next stage of my career and whether the time is right to take a step back from the stresses and strains of law firm partnership. Having spent 25 years working in Asia, often at Board level, I would like to think I know more than most non-Asians about doing business in the region and I would like to leverage that for the benefit of the business community. The key to getting best value from your advisers and/or problem solving is often knowing what questions to ask at an early stage. I would like to think I am better equipped than most to identify those questions so maybe there is a role out there in some sort of consulting capacity in which I can continue to add value. As ever, time will tell.

WHEN NOT WORKING AT SOLVING DISPUTES, WHERE COULD WE FIND YOU?

During Covid, I started to learn to play golf as attending the golf range was one of the first activities permitted in Malaysia as restrictions were lifted. So I can now often be found with a golf club in hand (I deliberately would not say playing golf as I am not sure what I do would be widely recognised as such just yet). Beyond that, I enjoy other sports and also find myself increasingly in the kitchen (another benefit of Covid).

REMEMBERING THAT OUR YOUNG LAWYERS NOW ARE THE CHANGE MAKERS OF THE FUTURE, WHAT ADVICE DO YOU HAVE ON CREATING A MEANINGFUL CAREER?

My eldest son has just embarked on a career as a lawyer (I did try to persuade him otherwise). When reflecting on what he could expect, I struggled to predict the future. I could clearly explain what my career had looked like but there has been so much change in recent years, I genuinely struggle to describe what his might look like over the next 5-10 years, let alone further ahead. However, there are some things that have changed for the better which will have an impact

on future lawyers. One of the most obvious changes is reguarding diversity. There is no doubt the profession is more diverse now than when I started out which is fantastic. However, as with all things, gains in one area can lead to challenges in others. Most people when talking about diversity immediately think of gender or possibly LGBT issues or race. However, the reason all of those things are important is for the diversity of opinions that they naturally bring with them. It is thus surprising to me that at a time when diversity is on everyone’s lips, one hears many stories of how diverse opinions are unwelcome. Or to put it another way, if you want to succeed you have to be in the ‘yes crowd’. This is an alarming trend which completely undermines the whole reason that other forms of diversity are so important.

So returning to your question, the best advice I can give young lawyers is – be prepared to work hard (this remains a non-negotiable element for success despite flexible working policies and the like changing the way we may do that); grab the opportunities that present themselves (Tokyo was never part of my life plan but it arguably made my career); keep an open mind and genuinely embrace diversity (i.e. be prepared to speak up and disagree respectfully or, in other words, be honest at all times). Finally, I firmly believe my greatest attribute that has enabled me to succeed over the past 30 years is common sense. It is remarkably uncommon!

Peter Godwin,Partner, Herbert Smith Freehills LLP

A specialist in crisis management/investigations and arbitration, Peter is the Managing Partner of the Kuala Lumpur office of HSF and former head of the Asia Disputes practice. He has practiced in Asia for 25 years. Consistently recognised by legal directories as a leading lawyer, Peter is praised by Chambers Asia Pacific as “commercially astute and a safe pair of hands”. He is admitted to practice in England and Wales, Hong Kong, and is licensed to advise on foreign law in Malaysia.

IHC Directory

Maritime

— Law Firms — ASIA

CAMBODIA

MAR & Associates

Tel: (855) 23 964 876, (855) 23 987 876

Email: borana@mar-associates.com

Contact: MAR Samborana (Mr.)

Website: www.mar-associates.com

CMA • E • IP • RE • REG

CHINA

Broad & Bright

Tel: (86) 10 8513 1818

Email: broadbright@broadbright.com

Contact: Mr Jun Ji (Jun_ji@broadbright.com)

Website: www.broadbright.com

COM • CMA • ENR • LDR • TMT

East & Concord Partners

Tel: (86) 10 6590 6639

Email: Beijing@east-concord.com

Contact: Mr. Dajin Li

Website: www.east-concord.com

BF • CM • CMA • IP • LDR

Llinks Law Offices

Tel: (86) 21 31358666

Email: master@llinkslaw.com

Website: www.llinkslaw.com

BF

• CM

• CMA

• INV

• LDR

Restructuring

W. K. To & Co.

Tel: (86) 10 8587 5076

Email: wktoco@wktoco.com

Contact: Cindy Chen Website: www.wktoco.com

CMA • E • LDR • RE • REG

HONG KONG

Conyers Dill & Pearman

Tel: (852) 2524 7106

Email: hongkong@conyers.com

Contact: Christopher W.H. Bickley, Partner, Head of Hong Kong Office

Website: www.conyers.com

BF • CM • CMA • INV • LDR

Elvinger Hoss Prussen

Tel: (852) 2287 1900

Email: xavierlesourne_hk@elvingerhoss.lu

Contacts: Mr Xavier Le Sourne, Partner, Ms Charlotte Chen, Counsel Website: www.elvingerhoss.lu

* Elvinger Hoss Prussen’s Hong Kong office provides inbound and outbound legal services only under Luxembourg law

BF • CM • CMA • INV • TX

W. K. To & Co.

Tel: (852) 3628 0000

Email: mail@wktoco.com

Contact: Vincent To Website: www.wktoco.com

CMA • E • LDR • RE

REG

INDIA

Anand and Anand

Tel: (91) 120 4059300

Email: pravin@anandandanand.com

Contact: Pravin Anand - Managing Partner

Website: www.anandandanand.com

IP • LDR

Clasis Law

Tel: (91) 11 4213 0000, (91) 22 4910 0000

Email: info@clasislaw.com

Contacts: Vineet Aneja, Mustafa Motiwala

Website: www.clasislaw.com

CMA • E • LDR • REG • RES

INDONESIA

ABNR (Ali Budiardjo, Nugroho, Reksodiputro)

Tel: (62) 21 250 5125/5136

Email: info@abnrlaw.com infosg@abnrlaw.com

Contacts: Emir Nurmansyah, enurmansyah@abnrlaw.com) Nafis Adwani, nadwani@abnrlaw.com Agus Ahadi Deradjat, aderadjat@abnrlaw.com

Website: www.abnrlaw.com

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

Emir Pohan & Partners

Tel: (62) 21 2965 1251

Email: emir.pohan@eplaw.id

Contact: Emir Pohan

Website: www.eplaw.id

COM • E • LDR • RES

Lubis Ganie Surowidjojo

Tel: (62) 21 831 5005, 831 5025

Email: lgs@lgslaw.co.id

Contacts: Dr. M. Idwan (‘Kiki’) Ganie

Website: www.lgslaw.co.id

CMA • COM • INS • LDR • PF

Makarim & Taira S.

Tel: (62) 21 5080 8300, 252 1272

Email: info@makarim.com

Contact: Lia Alizia

Website: www.makarim.com

BF • CMA • E • LDR • PF

Mochtar Karuwin Komar

Tel: (62) 21 5711130

Email: mail@mkklaw.net , ek@mkklaw.net

Contact: Emir Kusumaatmadja

Website: www.mkklaw.net

AV • CMA • ENR • LDR • PF

SSEK Legal Consultants

Tel: (62) 21 521 2038, 2953 2000

Email: ssek@ssek.com

Contact: Denny RahmansyahManaging Partner

Website: www.ssek.com

Twitter: @ssek_lawfirm

BF • CMA • E • ENR • RE

MALAYSIA

Adnan Sundra & Low

Tel: (603) 2070 0466

Email: enquiry@adnansundralow.com

Contacts: Deepak Sadasivan, Rodney D’Cruz

Website: www.asl.com.my

BF • CM • CMA • IF • PF

Azmi & Associates

Tel: (603) 2118 5000

Email: general@azmilaw.com

Contact: Dato’ Azmi Mohd AliSenior Partner

Website: www.azmilaw.com

BF • CM • CMA • ENR • PF

Trowers & Hamlins LLP

Tel: (601) 2615 0186

Email: nwhite@trowers.com

Contact: Nick White – Partner

Website: www.trowers.com

BF • CMA • ENR • IF • PF

PHILIPPINES

ACCRALAW (Angara Abello Concepcion Regala and Cruz Law Offices)

Tel: (632) 830 8000

Email: accra@accralaw.com

Contacts: Emerico O. De Guzman, Ana Lourdes Teresa A. Oracion, Neptali B. Salvanera

Website: www.accralaw.com

CMA

• E • IP • LDR • TX

DivinaLaw

Tel: (632) 822-0808

Email: info@divinalaw.com

Contact: Nilo T. Divina, Managing Partner

Website: www.divinalaw.com

BF • CMA • E • LDR • TMT

Morales & Justiniano

Tel: (632) 834 2551, (632) 832 7198, (632) 833 8534

Email: ramorales@primuslex.com

Contact: Mr. Rafael MoralesManaging Partner Website: www.primuslex.com

BF

• CM • CMA

• IP • LDR

Ocampo & Suralvo Law Offices

Tel: (632) 625 0765,

Email: info@ocamposuralvo.com

Contact: Jude Ocampo

Website: www.ocamposuralvo.com

CMA • ENR • PF • TX • TMT

SyCip Salazar

Hernandez & Gatmaitan

Tel: (632) 8982 3500, 3600, 3700

Email: sshg@syciplaw.com

Contact: Hector M. de Leon, Jr. - Managing Partner Website: www.syciplaw.com

BF • CMA • E • ENR • PF

Villaraza & Angangco

Tel: (632) 9886088

Email: fm.acosta@thefirmva.com

Contact: Franchette M. Acosta

Website: www.thefirmva.com

CMA • IP • LDR • REG • RES

SOUTH KOREA

Bae, Kim & Lee LLC

Tel: (82 2) 3404 0000

Email: bkl@bkl.co.kr

Contact: Kyong Sun Jung

Website: www.bkl.co.kr

BF • CMA • IA • LDR • RE

Kim & Chang

Tel: (82-2) 3703-1114

Email: lawkim@kimchang.com

Website: www.kimchang.com

COM • BF • CMA • IP • LDR

Yoon & Yang LLC

Tel: (82 2) 6003 7000

Email: yoonyang@yoonyang.com

Contacts: Jinsu Jeong, Junsang Lee, Myung Soo Lee

Website: www.yoonyang.com

COM • E • IP • LDR • TX

Yulchon LLC

Tel: (82-2) 528 5200

Website: www.yulchon.com

COM • CMA • IP • LDR • TX

TAIWAN

Deep & Far Attorneys-at-Law

Tel: (8862) 25856688

Email: email@deepnfar.com.tw

Contact: Mr. C. F. Tsai

Website: www.deepnfar.com.tw

COM • CM • E • IP • LDR

THAILAND

Chandler MHM Limited

Tel: (66) 2266 6485

Email: jessada.s@chandlermhm.com, satoshi.kawai@chandlermhm.com

Contacts: Jessada Sawatdipong, Satoshi Kawai

Website: www.chandlermhm.com

BF • CMA • ENR • PF • RE

Kudun & Partners Limited

Tel: (66) 2 838 1750

Email: info@kap.co.th kudun.s@kap.co.th chinawat.a@kap.co.th pariyapol.k@kap.co.th

Contacts: Kudun SukhumanandaCapital Markets, Corporate M&A, Banking & Finance Chinawat AssavapokeeTax, Corporate Restructuring, Insolvency Pariyapol KamolsilpLitigation / Dispute Resolution

Website: www.kap.co.th

CMA • CM • LDR • RES • TX

Pisut and Partners Co., Ltd.

Tel: (66) 202 66226, 202 66227

Email: info@pisutandpartners.com

Contacts: Mr. Pisut Rakwong

Website: www.pisutandpartners.com

CM • CMA • E • LDR • RE

Warot Business Consultant Ltd.

Tel: (66) 81802 5698

Email: warot@warotbusinessconsultant.com

Contact: Mr. Warot Wanakankowit

Website: www.warotbusinessconsultant.com

CM • CMA • E • REG • TX

Weerawong, Chinnavat & Partners Ltd.

Tel: (66) 2 264 8000

Email: Veeranuch.t@weerawongcp.com

Contacts: Veeranuch ThammavaranucuptSenior Partner

Website: www.weerawongcp.com

BF • CM • CMA • LDR • PF

VIETNAM

Bizconsult Law Firm

Tel: (84) 24 3933 2129

Email: info-hn@bizconsult.vn

Contact: Mr. Nguyen Anh Tuan(84) 24 3933 2129

Website: www.bizconsult.vn

CM • CMA • LDR • RE • RES

Global Vietnam Lawyers LLC

Tel: (84) 28 3622 3555

Email: info@gvlawyers.com.vn

Contacts: Nguyen Gia Huy Chuong

Website: www.gvlawyers.com.vn

CMA • IP • LDR • RE • REG

Indochine Counsel

Ho Chi Minh Office:

Tel: (84) 28 3823 9640

Email: duc.dang@indochinecounsel.com

Contact: Mr Dang The Duc

Hanoi Office:

Tel: (84) 24 3795 5261

Email: hanoi@indochinecounsel.com

Website: www.indochinecounsel.com

CM • CMA • PF

LE & TRAN

Tel: (84) (28) 38 421242

Contact: Stephen Le

Email: info@letranlaw.com

Website: www.letranlaw.com

COM | E | IA | LDR | RE | RES

Russin & Vecchi

Ho Chi Minh Office:

Tel: (84) 28 3824-3026

Email: lawyers@russinvecchi.com.vn

Contacts: Sesto E Vecchi - Managing Partner

Nguyen Huu Minh Nhut – Partner

Nguyen Huu Hoai – Partner

Hanoi Office:

Tel: (84) 24 3825-1700

Email: lawyers@russinvecchi.com.vn

Contact: Mai Minh Hang – Partner

Website: www.russinvecchi.com.vn

CMA • E • IP • INS • TMT

VILAF

Tel: (84) 28 3827 7300, (84) 24 3934 8530

Email: duyen@vilaf.com.vn, tung@vilaf. com.vn, anh@vilaf.com.vn

Contacts: Vo Ha Duyen, Ngo Thanh Tung, Dang Duong Anh

Website: www.vilaf.com.vn

BF

• CMA

• RE

• ENR • LDR

— Law Firms — MIDDLE EAST

BAHRAIN

Trowers & Hamlins

Tel: (973) 1 751 5600

Email: bahrain@trowers.com

Contact: Louise Edwards - Office Manager

Website: www.trowers.com

BF • CMA • IF • LDR • RE

OMAN

Trowers & Hamlins

Tel: (968) 2 468 2900

Email: oman@trowers.com

Contact: Louise Edwards - Office Manager

Website: www.trowers.com

BF • CMA • LDR • PF • RE

UAE

Afridi & Angell

Email: dubai@afridi-angell.com

Contact: Bashir Ahmed - Managing Partner

Website: www.afridi-angell.com

BF • CMA • LDR • RE • REG

AMERELLER

Tel: (971) 4 432.3671

Email: gunson@amereller.com

Contact: Christopher Gunson

Website: www.amereller.com

CMA • E • IA • LDR • REG

Horizons & Co

Tel: (971) 4 354 4444

Email: info@horizlaw.ae

Contact: Adv. Ali Al Zarooni

Website: www.horizlaw.ae

CMA • E • LDR • PF • RE

Trowers & Hamlins LLP

Dubai office:

Tel: (971) 4 351 9201

Email: dubai@trowers.com

Contact: Jehan Selim - Office Manager

Abu Dhabi office:

Tel: (971) 2 410 7600

Email: abudhabi@trowers.com

Contact: Jehan Selim - Office Manager

Website: www.trowers.com

BF • CMA • LDR • PF • RES

— Law Firms — NORTH AMERICA

CANADA

Meyer Unkovic Scott

Tel: (412) 456 2833

Email: du@muslaw.com

Contact: Dennis Unkovic

Website: www.muslaw.com

CMA • IP • IA • LDR • RE

— Arbitration — Services

Beijing Arbitration Commission / Beijing International Arbitration Center (Concurrently use)

Tel: (86) 10 85659558

Email: xujie@bjac.org.cn

Contact: Mr. Terence Xu（許捷）

Website: www.bjac.org.cn

Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre

Tel: (852) 2525 2381

Email: adr@hkiac.org

Website: www.hkiac.org

Maxwell Chambers Pte Ltd

Tel: (65) 6595 9010

Email: info@maxwell-chambers.com

Website: maxwell-chambers.com

Shenzhen Court of International Arbitration (Shenzhen Arbitration commission)

Tel: (86) 755 83501700, (86) 755 25831662

Email: info@scia.com.cn

Website: www.scia.com.cn

Alternative Legal Service Providers

LOD - Lawyers On Demand

Tel: (65) 6326 0200

Email: singapore@lodlaw.com

Contact: Oliver Mould

Website: lodlaw.com

Peerpoint by Allen & Overy

Tel: (852) 2974 7000

Email: info@peerpoint.com

Contact: Stephanie Szeto

Website: www.peerpoint.com

Vario from Pinsent Masons (HK) Ltd

Tel: (852) 2294 3454

Email: enquiries@pinsentmasonsvario.com

Website: https://pinsentmasonsvario.com

Risk, Investigation — and Legal — Support Services

LegalComet Pte Ltd (LEGALCOMET)

Tel: (65) 8118 1175

Contact: Michael Lew, Founder & CEO

Email: michael@legalcomet.com

Website: www.legalcomet.com

Konexo

Tel: (65) 66911 4567

Contacts: Joan Oh

Email: enquiries@konexoglobal.sg

Website: www.konexoglobal.com

— Non-Legal — Recruitment

True Recruitment Asia

Tel: (852) 5325 9168

WhatsApp: (852) 5325 9168

Email: kannan@truerecruitmentasia.com

— Sport & Leisure —

Splash Diving (HK) Limited

Learn to Dive and Fun Dive with the Winner of the PADI Outstanding Dive Centre/Resort Business Award!

Tel: (852) 9047 9603, (852) 2792 4495

Email: info@splashhk.com

Website: www.splashhk.com

— Charitable — Organisations

Impact India Foundation

An 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 9605-7

Email: nkshirsagar@impactindia.org

Website: www.impactindia.org

The best opportunities from top legal recruiters