LPA Asia Smart News

Through this newsletter, we provide you with a regular selection of legislative updates and judicial insights prepared by LPA lawyers from our four Asian offices, along with recent news from our teams.

LEGAL INSIGHTS IN ASIA

Hong Kong

Hong Kong’s new re-domiciliation regime: a game changer for global businesses

China

Making data a corporate asset: legal framework and process under the Corporate Registration Measures 2025

Singapore

PropertyGuru’s acquisition by EQT: an overview on merger control in Singapore

Japan

Upcoming amendments to the Act on Childcare Leave and Caregiver Leave

OUR LATEST DEALS

NEWS FROM LPA

---

LEGAL INSIGHTS IN ASIA

Hong Kong’s new re-domiciliation regime: a game changer for global businesses

The Companies (Amendment) (No.2) Bill 2024, which sets out the proposed company re-domiciliation regime in Hong Kong (the “Re-domiciliation Regime”), was gazetted on 20 December 2024 and introduced to the Legislative Council on 8 January 2025.

The Re-domiciliation Regime will offer foreign companies the opportunity to seamlessly relocate their corporate presence to Hong Kong without the need for winding-up in their original jurisdiction and re-incorporation in Hong Kong. Companies will be able to retain their legal identity, property, contracts, rights, obligations, and continuity of operations, through a simple, accessible and straightforward mechanism.

By simplifying the process and removing unnecessary barriers, Hong Kong aims to enhance its attractiveness as a global business hub and encouraging more international companies to establish a permanent presence in the city.

This development comes at a time when Hong Kong is experiencing record-high business registrations. In 2024, 145,053 new local businesses were established, which marks a net increase of 29,736 local firms compared to 2023. Meanwhile, 1,079 non-Hong Kong companies set up offices in the city in 2024, bringing the total number of registered non-local companies to 15,126, representing a 2% increase from the previous year and the highest on record.

• Key requirements

To qualify for re-domiciliation in Hong Kong, a company will have to meet, among others, the following conditions:

1. The company to be re-domiciled must be of the same or substantially the same type as one of the following four categories of companies that can incorporate under the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance, Cap. 622: (i) private companies limited by shares; (ii) public companies limited by shares; (iii) private unlimited companies with a share capital and (iv) public unlimited companies with a share capital. Companies will not be allowed to change company type through the re-domiciliation process.
2. The jurisdiction of the current place of incorporation of the company must allow re-domiciliation in foreign jurisdictions and the requirements imposed by the laws of the current place of incorporation must have been satisfied.
3. The company must be able to pay its debts as they fall due during the period of 12 months after the application date and must not be in liquidation or receivership.
4. The first financial year of the company in the place of incorporation must have ended on or before the date of the application for re-domiciliation.
5. The company’s shareholders must approve the re-domiciliation in the manner specified under the law of the original jurisdiction of incorporation or the constitutional documents of the company or, in the absence of specification therein, at a majority of 75% of the shareholders entitled to vote.

There will be no economic substance requirement, meaning that companies of any size will be able to take advantage of the Re-domiciliation Regime.

• Application process and required documentation

Foreign companies that intend to re-domicile to Hong Kong will have to submit an application to the Hong Kong Companies Registry to this effect, which shall include, among other supporting documents:

1. a legal opinion issued by a legal adviser qualified in the original place of incorporation of the company confirming, among other things, that the company is duly registered in its original place of incorporation, that the proposed re-domiciliation is allowed in that jurisdiction and that no petition or order for the winding-up of the company has been presented/made in that jurisdiction; and
2. accounts made up to the latest practicable date before the application date.

• Evidence of deregistration in the original place of incorporation

A company will be deemed to have re-domiciled to Hong Kong on the date that the Hong Kong Registrar of Companies issues its certificate of re-domiciliation. Re-domiciled companies will then be required to provide evidence of deregistration in their original place of domicile to the Companies Registry within 120 days from the date of re-domiciliation (although the Registrar of Companies may grant an extension if appropriate), failing which the company’s registration in Hong Kong will be revoked.

• No stamp duty or profits tax impact

As re-domiciliation does not (in itself) result in any change of beneficial ownership within the re-domiciled company, no stamp duty will be payable in relation to it. Furthermore, the profits tax liabilities of re-domiciled companies will remain unchanged because, under the Hong Kong’s territorial tax system, companies are required to pay profits tax based on profits arising or derived from trade, profession, or business carried on in Hong Kong, regardless of their place of domicile.

• A competitive edge for Hong Kong

The proposed Re-domiciliation Regime marks a significant milestone in reinforcing Hong Kong’s position as a leading destination for foreign businesses in Asia.

This new regime will offer a straightforward and accessible solution which is expected to give Hong Kong a significant competitive edge over neighboring jurisdictions that lack a similar re-domiciliation mechanism. The record-high local and non-local company registrations in 2024 further underscore Hong Kong’s status as a preferred hub for business expansion and international corporate presence.

The Bill is currently progressing through the legislative process, and the Re-domiciliation Regime will come into effect once the legislative process is completed.

Nicolas Vanderchmitt | Camilla Venanzi

 

Making data a corporate asset: legal framework and process under the Corporate Registration Measures 2025

On February 10, 2025, the Implementation Measures for Corporate Registration Management (the “Measures 2025”) came into force, making a landmark change: for the first time, shareholders of a company may contribute capital with their valuated data or virtual cyber properties, except where restricted by law.  This is a huge step for digital businesses and traditional industries with valuable data resources.

How to assetize data? The Measures 2025 do not explain how to turn data into an asset. This article explores the material conditions, procedures, and major legal issues related to data assetization based on existing laws and regulations.

• What kind of data can be used as an asset for equity contribution?

1. Evaluability

Before the issuance of the Measures 2025, the Interim Provisions on Accounting Treatment of Enterprise Data Resources issued by the Ministry of Finance of China on August 1, 2023, already stated that data resources can be assetized as long as they meet the criteria specified in the Chinese Enterprise Accounting Principles No.6, such as:

• • The data asset shall be identifiable in terms of accounting.
  • It shall have measurable economic benefits.
  • The costs of such a data asset shall be measured reliably.

Data is intangible and non-monetary.  According to the Chinese Corporate law, non-monetary assets shall be valued in currency before being used as capital contribution.  Besides, according to the Guidance on Valuation of Data Assets (effective October 1, 2023) issued by China Appraisal Society, to be recognized as an asset, data must meet the following conditions:

• • The data must be legally owned or controlled by the contributor.
  • It can be valued in monetary terms.
  • It can directly or indirectly generate economic benefits.

2. Tradability

While the Chinese Data Security Law (September 1, 2021) allows data tradability, some data transfer can be prohibited or restricted. Exceptions provided in the Measures 2025 include for instance:

• • Data that may endanger national security and public interests.
  • Core and important data subject to the prior consent of the competent government authorities.
  • Personal data or business data subject to the consent of the rights holders.

In addition, the data shall be collected and processed legally in accordance with Chinese data security laws. For cross-border data contributions, international data transfer regulations must also be respected.

• Key considerations when contributing data assets

1. Valuation risks

Inaccurate valuation of data assets for capital contribution may lead to insufficient capital contribution by the shareholder.

According to Article 49 of Chinese Corporate Law, the liable shareholder shall make up the discrepancy and shall compensate the invested enterprise for the losses incurred as a result.  Furthermore, in the event that the liable shareholder fails to remedy the shortfall, the other shareholders may be jointly liable.

Thus, it is highly recommended to engage a professional valuation company  to mitigate such risks.

2. Property rights of data assets

According to Article 49 of Chinese Corporate law, the capital contribution with non-monetary property is realized in the form of the transfer of the property rights of the asset. However, at present, there are no clear legal provisions on the transfer procedures for property rights of data assets.

In practice, various data trading institutions across the country have established data property rights registration practices such as the issuance of data rights registration certificates to clarify data ownership. However, as no legal standards have been set by the Chinese authorities, data ownership remains more complex to determine compared to capital contributions using traditional intangible assets such as equity or intellectual property rights.

3. Depreciation of data assets

The value of data may decrease over time if not properly maintained. Accordingly, the responsibility to maintain and update the contributed data assets shall be determined contractually to avoid any potential disputes.

According to Article 7 of the „Guiding Opinions on Strengthening Data Asset Management“ issued by the Ministry of Finance of China in December 2024, regular updates and maintenance of data assets are a digital management obligation for data asset owners. This also indicates that data assets have a continuous nature and can be regularly updated and accumulated, providing long-term value to their holders.

• How to contribute data as capital?

Although detailed regulations are yet to be drafted, companies can follow these general steps:

1. Identify your data resources. Determine which data resources can be assetized and used for capital contribution.
2. Review the compliance of your data resources and register the corresponding property rights.
3. Obtain a data valuation from a qualified appraisal agency with experience in valuing intangible assets.
4. Register the contribution and file the transfer of property rights.
5. Deliver the data assets and record them in the financial accounts of the invested enterprise.

Before the issuance of the Measures 2025, only state-owned enterprises and public data could be used for capital contribution.  The issuance of the Measures 2025 now enables all enterprises, including SMEs, to leverage their data assets for investment, unlocking new financing opportunities in China.

Fanny Nguyen | Estelle Chen | Yun Zhang

 

PropertyGuru’s acquisition by EQT: an overview on merger control in Singapore

On 6 December 2024, the Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore (“CCCS”) cleared Hedychium Ltd.’s (the “Buyer”) proposed acquisition of PropertyGuru, Southeast Asia’s leading[1] property site. This article provides a review of the transaction and contrasts the CCCS’s role in merger control in Singapore with that under French law.

*****

The Buyer. The Buyer is a wholly owned subsidiary of Hedychium Group Ltd., a special purpose acquisition vehicle formed specifically for the purpose of executing the merger.

EQT AB is a global investment firm with a strong emphasis on purpose-driven strategies, managing EUR 246 billion in total assets, including EUR 134 billion in fee-generating assets.

The Target. PropertyGuru Group Ltd. („PropertyGuru„) a public company registered in Cayman Islands listed on New York Stock Exchange is a leading property technology platform based in Southeast Asia. The company provides a comprehensive range of services, including an online property marketplace, digital sales and marketing, mortgage brokerage, home services platform, and real estate data and software solutions. Founded in 2007, PropertyGuru is widely recognized by both Singaporeans and foreigners as the leading platform for real estate sales.

The proposed transaction notified to the CCCS. The proposed transaction, as notified to the CCCS, involved the merger of the Buyer with and into PropertyGuru, with PropertyGuru continuing as a wholly owned subsidiary of Hedychium Group Ltd. (the “Proposed Transaction”).

CCCS Assessment of PropertyGuru’s acquisition. As part of its review process, CCCS conducted a public consultation from 4 November 2024 to 18 November 2024, soliciting feedback from various stakeholders, including PropertyGuru’s competitors and customers. Most respondents did not raise concerns regarding the Proposed Transaction[2].

EQT AB

↓

EQT Private Capital Asia​

↓

BPEA Fund VIII​ Private equity buyout fund​

↓   wholly owns indirectly

Hedychium Group Ltd.​ Special purpose acquisition vehicule​

↓  wholly owns

Hedychium Ltd.​

↓  now owns

PropertyGuru Group Ltd.

↓

PropertyGuru ​Pte. Ltd.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*****

Applicable Legal Framework. The main provisions governing mergers in Singapore are contained in Part III, Division 4 and Division 4A of the Singapore Competition Act 2004[3] (the “Act”).

The Act prohibits transactions that may result in a substantial lessening of competition (“SLC”) within any market for goods or services in Singapore.

In addition to the statutory provisions, CCCS issues Guidelines on Merger Procedures. CCCS also released a revised version of its Guidelines on the Substantive Assessment of Mergers, effective from 1 February 2022[4].

The CCCS has jurisdiction over the following transactions in Singapore:

• Mergers between previously independent undertakings;
• Acquisitions conferring control over an undertaking;
• Transfers of assets that significantly impact market dynamics; and
• The formation of joint ventures with structural or operational independence.

Unlike France, Singapore does not impose a mandatory pre-merger notification regime. Instead, merging parties must self-assess whether their transaction raises competition concerns. If a risk of infringement exists, they may voluntarily notify CCCS to seek clearance.

However, CCCS encourages notification when certain thresholds are met[5]. To assist parties in their self-assessment, CCCS provides indicative thresholds[6]:

• Turnover thresholds. While Singapore’s competition law does not mandate merger filings based on turnover, CCCS is unlikely to investigate mergers where each party’s individual turnover in Singapore is below SGD 5 million and the combined worldwide turnover of all parties is below SGD 50 million in the financial year preceding the merger[7].
• Market share thresholds. CCCS is generally unlikely to intervene unless the merged entity attains a market share in Singapore of at least 40%, or where it exceeds 20% and the combined market share of the three largest firms (CR3) in the relevant market(s) in Singapore reaches 70% or more post-merger[8].

Above all, the key consideration remains whether the transaction results in a substantial lessening of competition in the relevant market.[9] Regardless of whether turnover or market share thresholds are met, CCCS may still investigate if there are indications that the merger could significantly reduce competition.

Review Process and Notification. Merging entities may proceed with their transaction without awaiting CCCS approval unless CCCS initiates an investigation.

A voluntary Form M1 notification triggers a Phase 1 review, which CCCS completes within 30 working days[10]. If no competition concerns arise, the merger is cleared. If concerns remain, CCCS may initiate a Phase 2 investigation, requiring the submission of Form M2 and extending the review period to 120 working days[11].

Key numbers. [12] Since the merger control regime came into force on 1 July 2007, CCCS has received 109 merger notifications as of March 2024: 9 cases progressed to Phase 2 for complex mergers; 5 mergers were conditionally cleared, subject to commitments; 8 notifications were withdrawn by the merging parties; The remaining mergers were cleared at Phase 1. As of March 2024, the first and only decision on a failure to notify a merger resulted in remedies and fines of approximately $6.5 million each, imposed on both Uber and Grab in relation to Uber’s sale to Grab[13].

While parties may notify CCCS before or after closing, pre-closing notification is advisable. If CCCS determines that a completed merger is likely to substantially lessen competition in Singapore, the parties risk financial penalties.

Key factors in the CCCS’s Assessment. CCCS applies the SLC test, evaluating factors such as[14]:

• Market concentration and the merged entity’s market power;
• Competitive constraints from existing and potential competitors;
• Barriers to entry and expansion in the relevant market;
• Buyer power and potential efficiency gains; and

Exemptions and Remedies. Upon assessing a merger, CCCS may grant an exemption and approve the transaction despite potential anti-competitive effects if[15]:

• Public benefits outweigh any anti-competitive effects;
• The transaction is necessary for the survival of a failing firm, provided no less anti-competitive alternative exists; or
• The merger enhances efficiency and innovation, delivering tangible benefits to consumers.

CCCS may also grant approval subject to commitments undertaken by the parties. These commitments may be structural (e.g., divestitures) or behavioural (e.g., supply obligations). While CCCS generally favours proportionate remedies, the French Competition Authority (Autorité de la concurrence) in France more frequently imposes structural changes.

Penalties for Non-Compliance. In Singapore, failure to notify CCCS does not automatically result in penalties. However, if CCCS determines that a merger results in a SLC and infringes competition law, it may:

• Impose financial penalties of up to 10% of the company’s Singapore turnover per year of infringement, capped at three years;
• Order the reversal or modification of the merger, or, if necessary, block or unwind the transaction; and
• Require commitments to restore market competition.

In contrast, in France, where pre-merger notification obligations apply, failure to comply may result in fines of up to 5% of global turnover, along with potential modification or dissolution of the merger.

*****

As of 6 December 2024, as a conclusion of their assessment of, CCCS cleared the proposed transaction[16], and concluded that “the Proposed Transaction, if carried into effect, would not infringe section 54 of the Act” [17].

Indeed, the Proposed Transaction was not anticipated to result in a substantial lessening of competition[18] in Singapore’s digital real estate advertising services market[19] as there should be:

• No market overlap as the Buyer and PropertyGuru do not compete in products and services supply in Singapore[20] (no horizontal effects);
• No vertical integration concerns as the Buyer and PropertyGuru do not have any current or potential vertical relationships that could affect the competition[21] (no vertical effects);
• No complementary offering as the Buyer and PropertyGuru do not supply complementary goods and services in Singapore[22] (no conglomerate effects).

Completion of the deal. The Proposed Transaction was expected to close in Q4 2024 or Q1 2025[23]. On 13 December 2024, PropertyGuru finally announced the completion of the acquisition of PropertyGuru by BPEA Private Equity Fund VIII for USD 6.70 per share in cash in a transaction that values PropertyGuru at an equity value of approximately USD 1.1 billion[24].

In connection with the closing, PropertyGuru’s shares ceased to be listed on the New York Stock Exchange, and the company will transition to private ownership[25]. The headquarters will continue to be based in Singapore[26].

Key Takeaways for French Groups Different approaches to merger control Under French competition law, mandatory pre-merger notifications are required when certain thresholds are met, and the merging parties cannot proceed with the transaction until the competition authority has reviewed and approved it. In contrast, Singapore allows voluntary self-assessment by the merging parties, with notification to the CCCS being optional unless there are concerns regarding potential anti-competitive effects. While both jurisdictions’ analytical frameworks align—applying the SLC test and assessing market power, competitive constraints, and efficiencies—Singapore’s approach is more flexible. It emphasizes self-regulation, allowing transactions to proceed unless the CCCS identifies competition concerns. Although CCCS has the authority to block or unwind anti-competitive mergers, it provides businesses with greater flexibility in structuring their transactions. What is the risk of non-notification? While Singaporean law does not mandate pre-merger notification to the CCCS, parties conducting a self-assessment are still exposed to potential fines for breaches of Article 54 of the Singapore Competition Act[27]. Given the stakes, merger control risks should be managed with the same diligence as in France. Strategic benefits of voluntary notification When concerns arise, voluntary notification can be a strategic option to secure clearance and, if necessary, negotiate commitments under CCCS oversight at an early stage. This is particularly important given that the CCCS is not bound by a specific time frame and has previously initiated investigations on unnotified mergers completed years ago[28].

[1] PropertyGuru Group website, Press Releases, ‘EQT Completes Acquisition of PropertyGuru’, 13 December 2024; based on SimilarWeb data between January 2024 and June 2024.

[2] CCCS, Grounds of Decision issued by the CCCS in relation to the Proposed Acquisition of PropertyGuru by Hedychium, 6 December 2024, Case No. 400-140-2024-003, para. I, 2; mentioned in Concurrences, ‘The Singaporean Competition Authority clears the proposed acquisition of a property technology platform by a private equity fund (PropertyGuru / Hedychium)’, 6 December 2024.

[3] Singapore Competition Act 2004, No. 46 of 2004.

[4] CCCS, Guidelines on the Substantive Assessment of Mergers, 2022.

[5] CCCS, Guidelines on Merger Procedures, 2022, para. 4.5.

[6] CCCS, Guidelines on Merger Procedures, 2022, para. 3.7.

[7] CCCS, Guidelines on Merger Procedures, 2022, para. 3.5.

[8] CCCS, Guidelines on Merger Procedures, 2022, para. 3.6.

[9] CCCS, Guidelines on Merger Procedures, 2022, para. 3.4.

[10] CCCS, Guidelines on Merger Procedures, 2022, para. 4.12.

[11] CCCS, Guidelines on Merger Procedures, 2022, para. 4.17.

[12] Norton Rose Fulbright, Competition law fact sheet, Singapore, April 2024, para. ‘Mergers and acquisitions’, p.7.

[13] CCCS, Notice of Infringement Decision, Case No. 500/001/18, Sale of Uber’s Southeast Asian business to Grab in consideration of a 27.5% stake in Grab, 24 September 2018, paras. 430 and 438.

[14] CCCS, Guidelines on the Substantive Assessment of Mergers, 2022, para. 2.3.

[15] CCCS, Guidelines on Merger Procedures, 2022, para. 7.

[16] CCCS, Decision No. CCCS 400-140-2024-003, 6 December 2024; CCCS, Press release, PropertyGuru/Hedychium,  6 December 2024.

[17] CCCS, Grounds of Decision issued by the CCCS in relation to the Proposed Acquisition of PropertyGuru by Hedychium, 6 December 2024, Case No. 400-140-2024-003, para. IV, 8; also mentioned in Concurrences, ‘The Singaporean Competition Authority clears the proposed acquisition of a property technology platform by a private equity fund (PropertyGuru / Hedychium)’, 6 December 2024.

[18] CCCS, Grounds of Decision issued by the CCCS in relation to the Proposed Acquisition of PropertyGuru by Hedychium, 6 December 2024, Case No. 400-140-2024-003, para. IV, 8; also mentioned in Concurrences, ‘The Singaporean Competition Authority clears the proposed acquisition of a property technology platform by a private equity fund (PropertyGuru / Hedychium)’, 6 December 2024.

[19] Ibid., para. III, 7.

[20] Ibid., para. IV, 8, a.; Ibid.

[21] Ibid., para. IV, 8, b.; Ibid.

[22] Ibid., para. IV, 8, c.; Ibid.

[23] Singapore Business Review, ‘EQT Private Capital Asia to acquire PropertyGuru for US$1.1b’, 2024.

[24] PropertyGuru Group website, Press Releases, ‘EQT Completes Acquisition of PropertyGuru’, 13 December 2024.

[25] Singapore Business Review, ‘EQT completes acquisition of PropertyGuru’, December 2024.

[26] Singapore Business Review, ‘EQT Private Capital Asia to acquire PropertyGuru for US$1.1b’, 2024.

[27] CCCS, Guidelines on the Substantive Assessment of Mergers, 2022, para. 3.12.

[28] Mergerfiler.com, FAQ, Singapore, question 8, 17 September 2024.

Arnaud Bourrut-Lacouture | Bérengère Roig | Charline Levasseur

 

Upcoming amendments to the Act on Childcare Leave and Caregiver Leave (effective 1 April 2025 and 1 October 2025)

As part of Japan’s ongoing efforts to create an environment in which both men and women can successfully balance their professional responsibilities with childcare and caregiving duties, important amendments to the Act on Childcare Leave and Caregiver Leave and the Act on Advancement of Measures to Support Raising Next-Generation Children will come into effect in two phases, on 1 April 2025 and 1 October 2025.

These amendments are aimed at enhancing flexibility in work arrangements, increasing transparency regarding childcare leave utilization, and strengthening employer obligations to support workers who are pregnant, raising children, or caring for family members. Below are the main amendments to the regulations.

• Key amendments effective 1 April 2025

1. Expansion of Overtime Exemption: Employees who are caring for children aged three up to school age will now be exempt from overtime work upon request, extending a measure previously limited to employees with children under three.
2. Broadening the scope of days off for sick child: Days off for a sick child historically focused on direct caregiving (for example, caring for a sick child), will now be expanded to cover additional activities such as attending school events or caring for a child when school is closed due to infectious diseases. In addition, employers will no longer be able to exclude employees with less than six months of seniority from this system through the conclusion of a Labor Management Agreement anymore. These measures will also be extended to employees having children up to the third year of elementary school, (previously limited to employees with children below school age).
3. Mandatory disclosure of childcare leave utilization (for employers with more than 300 employees): Larger employers will be required to publicly disclose their rates of childcare leave utilization. This measure aims to promote greater corporate accountability, encouraging companies to foster supportive and family-friendly work environments.
4. Enhanced measures to prevent caregiving-related resignations: To ensure that caregiving leave and support systems can be accessed smoothly and without hesitation, employers will be required to implement at least one of the following measures:

• Conduct training: Offer training sessions on caregiving leave and related support systems to ensure that both employees and managers understand available options.
• Establish a consultation framework: Set up a dedicated consultation desk or similar support structure to handle inquiries and guide employees through the process of applying for caregiving leave or utilizing caregiving support measures.
• Provide examples of utilization: Collect and share examples of employees who have successfully taken caregiving leave or made use of caregiving support measures. Real-life cases can help normalize leave-taking and reassure employees considering their options.
• Communicate a supportive policy: Publicize internal policies that encourage the use of caregiving leave and support systems, ensuring that all employees are aware of the company’s stance and feel supported.

In addition, employers will need to provide individualized notification, guidance, and support measures for employees who are caring for family members. This includes supplying information on available resources and implementing work environment improvements (such as work from home arrangements) to help employees continue working while fulfilling caregiving responsibilities.

• Key amendments effective 1 October 2025

1. Flexible work arrangements and individual consultations: Employers must choose at least two out of the following five measures and make them available to eligible employees:

• adjusting start times or other scheduling arrangements
• telework or remote working opportunities (at least 10 days per month)
• on-site childcare facilities or other childcare support initiatives
• additional child rearing support leave (at least 10 days per year)
• shorter working hours system

Employers will also be required to proactively engage with employees, consulting with them individually to determine suitable arrangements.

2. Mandatory consideration for pregnant employees and new parents: Upon notification of pregnancy or childbirth, employers must engage in good-faith discussions with affected employees and take reasonable steps to accommodate their childcare responsibilities.

Looking ahead

These changes underscore a growing recognition of the importance of work-life balance and support for employees with family obligations. Employers should begin reviewing their current policies, procedures, and internal communication strategies to ensure compliance with the new requirements by the respective implementation dates.

Mina Ishikawa

 

OUR LATEST DEALS

Altavia / Media

LPA Hong Kong advised Altavia Group, a leading independent and international marketing communication group in the retail sector, on its acquisition of Singapore-based ielo design, a leading agency specializing in retail design and brand communication. LinkedIn

Ciel & Terre / Energy

LPA Tokyo advised Ciel & Terre, a French pioneer in floating solar power, in the sale of a floating solar portfolio in Japan to a Japanese consortium. LinkedIn

Viseo / IT services

LPA Hong Kong advised VISEO group on its acquisition of Shanghai-based TekID, specialized in cybersecurity and digital risk management. LinkedIn

 

NEWS FROM LPA

Rebrand | Celebrating its 40th anniversary, LPA-CGR avocats becomes LPA Law. This change reflects both our heritage of 40 years providing legal services in France, and our positioning as a key player for our clients’ expansion abroad. With 250 lawyers, including 150 in Paris, and 11 offices abroad, our new name LPA Law confirms this international positioning. We are amongst the most active French law firms in Africa, Germany and Asia. LinkedIn

Team | Marie Lefevre Cormier joined LPA Singapore as Associate in Commercial and Private International Law, effective from January 2025. Marie is qualified in French law (Attorney-at-Law, Paris Bar) and specializes in Commercial Law, covering all aspects of business relationships. Marie’s expertise includes contract drafting and negotiation, providing clients with comprehensive legal support and strategic guidance. LinkedIn

Ranking | LPA Shanghai has been awarded, for the second consecutive year, in the Corporate and M&A Foreign Firms practice, achieving Tier 5, in the Legal 500 Asia Pacific 2025 edition. LinkedIn

Ranking | LPA Hong Kong has been awarded, for the second consecutive year, in the Domestic and International Corporate Tax practice, achieving Tier 3, in the Legal 500 Asia Pacific 2025 edition. LinkedIn

Award | Chin Hiang Wu, Of Counsel at LPA Singapore, is among the winners of the LexisNexis 40 UNDER 40 2024 Southeast Asia list. This remarkable recognition reflects Chin Hiang’s exceptional expertise in legal drafting, technical precision, and unwavering dedication to excellence in the practice of law. LinkedIn

Appointment | Kosuke OIE, attorney-at-law in Japan and partner at LPA Tokyo, has been appointed as Director of the Office of International Affairs at the Japan Federation of Bar Associations (JFBA) as of January 2025. In his new role, Kosuke will continue to strengthen the JFBA’s international ties by collaborating with foreign bars, including the Barreau de Paris and the Conseil national des Barreaux, while representing Japan at key international legal events. LinkedIn

Past event | Lionel Vincent, Managing Partner at LPA Tokyo, had the privilege of participating in the 33rd annual meeting of the Club Franco-Japonais in Tokyo, on November 22, 2024. The Club, which brings together over forty leaders from major French and Japanese companies, continues to serve as a vital platform for dialogue on strategic economic and geopolitical issues. This meeting provided a unique opportunity to discuss high-level economic and commercial topics crucial to both parties and the Franco-Japanese partnership. LinkedIn

Past event | LPA Law teams participated in the 2024 French-Japanese Business Summit co-organized by the French Chamber of Commerce and Industry in Japan on December 3, 2024 in Tokyo on the theme „Inventing a Better Future in a Changing World“. This summit was a fantastic opportunity to engage in meaningful discussions on innovation, sustainability, and the future of Franco-Japanese collaboration. LinkedIn

Past event | As part of the celebrations marking 60 years of bilateral relations between France and China, and the historical ties between Lyon and Shanghai, LPA Shanghai participated in the International Francophonie meetings in Shanghai on December 5, 2024. Estelle Chen and Yun Zhang, associate lawyers at LPA Shanghai, had the privilege of speaking at a roundtable dedicated to entrepreneurship, sustainable development, and higher education. See more

Past event | On December 12, 2024, Ayano Kanezuka, Partner at LPA Tokyo, had the privilege of leading a conference on the 2025 reform of Japan’s Data Protection Law, focusing on enhanced security requirements and compliance challenges for businesses operating in Japan. The new reform of the Personal Data Protection Act is set to come into effect in June 2025. LinkedIn

Past event | Fanny Nguyen, Partner at LPA Shanghai, and Nicolas Vanderchmitt, Partner at LPA Hong Kong, held a conference on the theme China in question(s): adapting strategic and legal frameworks to China’s “new normal”, on December 17, 2024, at our Paris office. This event, organized in partnership with Advention and supported by the Comité France Chine, brought together more than 50 participants. See more

Past event | Lionel Vincent, Partner at LPA Tokyo, had the privilege of speaking at the Breakfast Talk: Doing Business in Japan, held in Singapore on February 12, 2025, and organized by the French Chamber of Commerce in Singapore. This event provided a fantastic platform for meaningful discussions on Japan’s economic landscape, market potential, and attractiveness for Foreign Investors. LinkedIn