LPA Asia Smart News

Through this newsletter, we offer you a regular selection of legislative and judicial decision insights prepared by LPA lawyers from its 4 Asian offices as well as some recent news from our teams.

SMART ALERT

Hong Kong and PRC expand scope and remedies in mutual enforcement of court judgments

LEGAL INSIGHTS IN ASIA

Hong Kong

Cross-border transfer of personal information between Hong Kong and nine Mainland cities to become less onerous with new contract

China

GBA: What’s in it for China based companies?

The New Company Law in China: Highlights of keys amendments

Singapore

Non-compete clauses in Singapore: Between the development of guidelines and the debate on a potential ban

Japan

New Japanese invoice system and impact on small businesses

OUR LATEST DEALS

NEWS FROM LPA

 

---

SMART ALERT

Hong Kong and PRC expand scope and remedies in mutual enforcement of court judgments

Five years ago, the Supreme People’s Court of the People’s Republic of China (the “PRC” or “Mainland China”) and the Department of Justice of Hong Kong signed an Arrangement aimed at expanding the scope of the jurisdiction of, and the relief available to, courts in respectively Hong Kong and PRC when called upon to recognize and enforce each other’s court rulings in civil and commercial matters (the “Arrangement”).[i] To implement the Arrangement, Hong Kong passed the Mainland Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (Reciprocal Enforcement) Ordinance (Cap. 645) and the Mainland Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (Reciprocal Enforcement) Rules (Cap. 645A) which entered into effect on 29 January 2024. The new Ordinance replaced the Mainland Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Ordinance (Cap. 597), which will continue to apply to judgments regarding contracts which provided for exclusive jurisdiction of the PRC courts and were signed prior to the entry into effect of the new Ordinance. The Supreme People’s Court has also issued its rules for the implementation of the Arrangement in the PRC which entered into effect on the date of the new Ordinance. 

The key changes in the mutual recognition and enforcement regime are discussed below. 

Removal of exclusive jurisdiction requirement 

Previously only judgements regarding agreements containing a clause giving exclusive jurisdiction to the courts of the place where the judgment was made (the “Originating Court”) could be recognised and enforced in the other jurisdiction.  Under the Arrangement, it now suffices that the court of the place of enforcement (the “Enforcing Court”) is satisfied that the Originating Court had jurisdiction to make the judgment. An Originating Court has jurisdiction if a sufficient connection with the location of the Originating Court can be established, such as that it was the place where the defendant resides or has its business, the agreement was to be performed, the tort was committed or the intellectual property was protected. 

Judgments in a wider range of civil and commercial matters now enforceable

The Arrangement expands the scope of judgments capable of being recognized and enforced.  Whereas in the past only monetary judgements could be enforced, enforceable judgments now extend to most civil and commercial cases, including both monetary and non-monetary judgments and judgments for the performance of acts, such as injunctions.  The Arrangement also applies to orders for the payment of money as compensation or civil damages in criminal proceedings. 

Judgments on specified matters are expressly excluded from recognition and enforcement.  These matters include bankruptcy, insolvency, succession to or administration or distribution of an estate, confirmation of the validity of an arbitration agreement or the setting aside of an arbitral award, recognition and enforcement of judgments or arbitral awards of other countries or regions and certain matrimonial, family, maritime, patents and intellectual property matters.  Further, preservation measures, anti-suit injunctions and orders for interim relief cannot be enforced under the Arrangement, as they do not fall within the definition of “judgment” under the Arrangement. 

A condition for a judgment to be enforceable under the Arrangement is that the party ordered to pay a sum of money or to perform an act under the judgment failed to comply with such order during the two years preceding the date of the application. 

Wider scope of courts whose judgements can be enforced 

Under the Arrangement, judgements at more court levels can be mutually enforced. The following judgments from Mainland China can now be enforced in Hong Kong: 

1. first instance judgments of a High People’s Court, an Intermediate People’s Court or a Primary People’s Court which cannot be appealed or are past the time limit for appeal; 
2. second instance judgments of a High People’s Court or an Intermediate People’s Court; and 
3. judgments of the Supreme People’s Court.
    

Judgments of the following Hong Kong courts can now be enforced in Mainland China: the Court of Final Appeal, the Court of Appeal, the Court of First Instance, the District Court, the Labour Tribunal, the Lands Tribunal, the Competition Tribunal and the Small Claims Tribunal.

Registration and grounds for refusing recognition and enforcement

Hong Kong’s authorised Enforcing Court is the Court of First Instance (the “CFI”).  To seek recognition and enforcement of a PRC judgement in Hong Kong, an application must be made ex parte to the CFI by originating summons with the support of an affidavit.  Once registered, the judgment can be enforced as if it were a judgment of the CFI itself.  The other party may apply to the CFI for an order to set aside the registration within 14 days after the date of service of the notice of registration. 

The CFI has the power to refuse recognition and enforcement of an Originating Court if, after examination, it determines that: 

1. the Originating Court had no jurisdiction over the case; 
2. the defendant to the original proceedings was not summoned in accordance with the law of the place of the Originating Court or was otherwise not given a reasonable opportunity to defend the proceedings;  
3. the judgment was obtained by fraud; 
4. a court of the requested place of enforcement has given a judgment on the same dispute or has recognised a judgment on the same dispute rendered by the courts of another jurisdiction; 
5. the requested place of enforcement has made an arbitral award on the same dispute or has recognised an arbitral award on the same dispute made in another jurisdiction; 
6. the judgment has been reversed or set aside through appeal or retrial procedures; and 
7. the enforcement of the registered judgment is manifestly contrary to the basic principles of the law of the place which is asked to recognize and enforce the judgment.

Reflections   

The Arrangement significantly expands the scope of judgments capable of reciprocal recognition and enforcement in Hong Kong and Mainland China. This will result in substantial cost-savings for parties seeking to enforce judgments.  Parties to a contract may also seek to ensure that their contract satisfies the jurisdictional connection requirement so that they can litigate disputes in the Hong Kong courts and, if necessary, seek enforcement in Mainland China. 

Note 

[i] The full name of the Arrangement is “Arrangement on Reciprocal Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters by the Courts of the Mainland and of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region” and it was signed on 18 January 2019. 

Nicolas Vanderchmitt | Erik Leyssens | Camilla Venanzi 

 

LEGAL INSIGHTS IN ASIA

Cross-border transfer of personal information between Hong Kong and nine Mainland cities to become less onerous with new contract

On 13 December 2023, the Cyberspace Administration of China and the Innovation, Technology and Industry Bureau of Hong Kong (the “ITIB”) jointly promulgated, with immediate effect, the “Implementation Guidelines on the Standard Contract for Cross-border Flow of Personal Information Within the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area (Mainland, Hong Kong)” (the “Guidelines”). The Guidelines aim to facilitate the exchange of personal information between Hong Kong and nine cities in South-East China (i.e. Guangzhou, Shenzhen, Zhuhai, Foshan, Huizhou, Dongguan, Zhongshan, Jiangmen and Zhaoqing) by introducing a standard contract (the “GBA Standard Contract”).  Individuals and organisations in those cities and Hong Kong have the option to enter into the GBA Standard Contract so that they can transfer personal information within the GBA on less onerous terms than those under the standard clauses for personal information transfers that are mandatory in the People’s Republic of China (the “PRC Standard Contract”). In this article, a reference to the Greater Bay Area (the “GBA”), which is a term that normally includes the nine above-mentioned Mainland cities, Hong Kong and Macau, is a reference to the GBA excluding Macau.

Voluntary nature of the GBA Standard Contract

Parties exchanging personal information in the GBA have the option, but not an obligation, to enter into a GBA Standard Contract.  Hong Kong parties to a GBA Standard Contract are not exempted from, and should comply with, the provisions of Hong Kong’s data privacy protection law – the Personal Data (Privacy) Ordinance, Cap. 486 (the “PDPO”).  In addition, Hong Kong parties should be aware that unlike the PDPO, which does not prohibit transfer of personal information outside Hong Kong, the GBA Standard Contract does not allow transfer outside the GBA of personal information received under a GBA Standard Contract.

Conditions of the GBA Standard Contract

A precondition for use of the GBA Standard Contract is that both the personal information processor (the “PI Processor”) and recipient (the “PI Recipient”) are registered (in the case of organizations) or located (in the case of individuals) in the GBA.

Parties entering into the GBA Standard Contract must comply with the following main requirements:

1. No personal information may be transferred, whether directly or by way of onward transfer, outside the GBA. Companies in the GBA which share IT systems with affiliates outside the GBA should ensure that personal information exchanged under a GBA Standard Contract cannot be accessed from outside the GBA.  
2. Prior to the cross-border transfer of personal information, the PI Processor must inform the person whose personal information is to be transferred or obtain the consent of such person to the transfer as required by the laws of the PI Processor’s jurisdiction. 
3. Prior to the cross-border transfer of personal information, the PI Processor must conduct a personal information protection impact assessment on, amongst others, the legality, legitimacy and necessity of the purposes and means of the personal information processing, the impact on and security risks to the rights and interests of the person whose personal information is transferred and whether measures are in place to ensure the security of the transferred personal information. 
4. If during the processing of personal information by the PI Processor or the PI Recipient there is a personal information security breach, the PI Processor or the PI Recipient (as applicable) must immediately notify the Cyberspace Administration of Guangdong Province or the ITIB, as applicable, and take remedial measures. 

The PI Processor and the PI Recipient must file the GBA Standard Contract within 10 working days from its effective date with the Cyberspace Administration of Guangdong Province (if based in China) and the Office of the Government Chief Information Officer (if based in Hong Kong).  

Advantages of the GBA Standard Contract 

The GBA Standard Contract allows personal information to be exchanged with fewer restrictions when compared to the PRC Standard Contract. The following are two examples of this:   

1. The GBA Standard Contract does not impose the PRC Standard Contract’s restrictions on the volume of personal information that can be transferred across the border (except if such personal information is considered “critical data”). 
2. Under the GBA Standard Contract, when a PI Recipient transfers the personal information it has received to a subsequent recipient it does not need to do so on terms and conditions that are at least as stringent as the PRC laws applicable to the transfer of personal information. 

Conclusion 

The GBA Standard Contract is expected to facilitate the cross-border flow of personal information within the GBA by allowing parties to elect a transfer regime that is less stringent when compared to the one available under the PRC Standard Contract. Companies in Hong Kong which exchange information with companies in the GBA and wish to adopt the GBA Standard Contract should take adequate measures to prevent the flow of information outside the GBA and ensure their continued compliance with the PDPO. 

Nicolas Vanderchmitt | Erik Leyssens | Camilla Venanzi 

 

GBA: What’s in it for China based companies?

Unlocking Growth: The Strategic Advantages of Settling in China’s Greater Bay Area for Local Businesses

The China’s Greater Bay Area (“GBA”) is a unique economic zone with numerous benefits for Foreign and Chinese businesses based in China (“Chinese companies”). The regional location, the tax incentives, the investment made by the local governments and the legal environment are keys to the GBA ‘s success. The Global Investment Promotion Conference for the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area (Greater Bay Area), held in Guangzhou on Nov 8, 2023, led to 859 investment and trade project agreements with a total value exceeding 2.24 trillion yuan ($320 billion). 

Premium location for financial Opportunities, and access to Capital 

The GBA’s strategic location, Hong Kong being the global financial hub in the region and the “one country, two systems” principle provide Chinese companies with unparalleled and increased access to international markets. This international connectivity facilitates cross-border trade and investment, fundraising, allowing Chinese businesses to expand into international markets. 

Free Trade Zones (FTZs) and Trade Facilitation 

Free Trade Zones (within the GBA) established in Qianhai (Shenzhen), Nansha (Guangzhou) and Hengqin (Zhuhai), create a business-friendly environment for Chinese companies. Guangzhou Greater Bay Technology’s Nansha headquarters base which was put into operation on October 2023, is the first professional facility in the world to mass-produce advanced ultrafast charging (10-15 minutes) and even extremely fast charging (5-10 min, XFC) electric power batteries. China’s first commercial aerospace industrial base, namely “CAS Space Industrial Base”, has also started operation in the Nansha district of Guangzhou, with a targeted annual output capacity of 30 carrier rockets. FTZs offer relaxed regulatory frameworks, simplified customs and administrative procedures, and other trade facilitation measures (especially important for the cross-border E-Commerce activity).  

High-level Infrastructure 

The GBA has substantially invested in infrastructure development, including transportation networks, logistics, and technology parks. Chinese companies benefit from improved connectivity and efficient logistics, streamlining supply chain processes. The state-of-the-art technology parks provide a conducive environment for research and development, supporting companies in their quest for innovation. 

Talent and Innovation Ecosystem 

The GBA is known for its concentration of talent, particularly in the technology and innovation sectors. Companies based in the GBA can leverage this talent pool to drive innovation and stay competitive in rapidly evolving industries. The collaborative innovation ecosystem between cities in the GBA like Shenzhen and Hong Kong fosters research and development activities, providing Chinese companies with more opportunities to stay at the forefront of technological advancements. The State Council released in August 2023 a plan to boost the high-quality development of the Shenzhen part of a sci-tech innovation cooperation zone jointly developed by Shenzhen and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR). In May 2023, Siemens Healthineers confirmed an additional investment of at least 1 billion yuan ($142 million) to establish a R&D and production site in Shenzhen, the second of its kind in the southern metropolis of Guangdong province. 

Favorable tax regime 

The GBA grants Chinese companies when being established within the area some tax incentives and preferential policies (for instance reduced corporate income tax rates, tax holidays, and other favorable tax treatments). The objective is to encourage the establishment of operations within the GBA, to promote regional development and to attract investments. 

Regional Legal Framework 

The GBA offers Chinese businesses a transparent and efficient legal system with Hong Kong being a common law jurisdiction. In addition, some cities within the GBA (like Shenzhen) have been granted the right to elaborate their own local regulation so to progressively reach international standards. 

The region also offers various dispute resolution mechanisms, including international arbitration services, providing companies with reliable options for resolving commercial disputes. 

The Chinese government has invested substantially to create a regional environment benefiting from the advantages of each of the cities it is being composed of (technology, innovation, attractiveness, tax incentives, etc.). This is an opportunity for Chinese companies to expand internationally their businesses while being offered a favorable and secure legal environment. 

This article was published in HongKongEcho Magazine published by the French Chamber in Hong Kong in 2023.

Fanny Nguyen 

 

The New Company Law in China: Highlights of Keys Amendments

On December 29, 2023, the “Company Law of the People’s Republic of China (2023 Revision)” was formally approved and is set to come into effect from July 1, 2024.
The newly amended company law introduces significant changes in areas such as capital contribution, shareholder rights and responsibilities, corporate governance, and management responsibilities. These changes will have a substantial impact on all companies in China, including existing and future Foreign-Invested Enterprises (FIEs).

The revised Company Law now comprises a total of 266 articles across 15 chapters, with 112 new or amended articles. These changes touch upon various aspects, including corporate governance, capital contribution, management responsibility, corporate disclosure, corporate bonds, corporate litigation and registration.

This article aims to highlight some of the major changes in the new Company Law:

1. Setting a five-year time limit for capital contribution (Article 47 and Article 266)

All shareholders of a Limited Liability Company (LLC) must fully contribute their subscribed capital within five years from the company’s establishment. This deadline also applies to capital increases.

Existing LLCs with a capital contribution period exceeding five years, need to gradually adjust to the new five-year limit. However, it remains unclear whether a special grace period will be provided for existing companies or if the five-year maximum time limit for existing companies will commence from the effective date of the new Companies Law.

2. Obligation for the board of directors to oversee capital contribution (Article 51)

In order to ensure compliance with the stipulated capital contribution time limit, the new Company Law clearly stipulates that, after the establishment of an LLC, the board of directors shall verify shareholders’ capital contributions.

If shareholders fail to fulfill their capital contribution obligations as per the articles of association , the company must issue a written reminder to the shareholders, specifying a grace period of not less than 60 days for the payment of capital contributions.

Administrators failing to fulfill their obligations, resulting in losses for the company, will be held liable for compensation.

3. Loss of rights for defaulting on capital contributions (Article 52)

If a shareholder fails to fulfill his/her obligation for capital contribution within the specified period mentioned in the company’s written reminder, the company may, through a resolution of the board of directors, issue a notice of loss of rights.

In this case, the shareholder will forfeit the rights corresponding to the unpaid contribution from the date of the notice.

If these lost rights are not transferred or canceled within six months, other shareholders must compensate for the entire amount of the corresponding capital contribution in proportion to their respective shareholdings.

4. Capital contributions acceleration rules to protect creditors (Article 54)

According to the new company law, in cases where a company is unable to pay off its due debts, the company or the creditors of the due debts shall have the right to demand early capital contributions from shareholders whose subscribed capital contributions are not yet due for payment.

5. Joint and Several Liability for Capital Contribution (Article 88)

In the case of the transfer of equity with unpaid capital contribution, which is not yet due, the transferee assumes the obligation; if the transferee fails to contribute on time, the transferor shall bear the supplementary liability.
In addition, for the transfer of equity with due but unpaid contributions or undervalued contributions, transferor and transferee are jointly and severally liable, unless transferee was unaware or could not have known about the shortfall.

6. Corporate governance

Noteworthy changes have been introduced in the responsibilities of directors and legal representatives.
Firstly, the legal representative can now be the general manager or any director (and not only the chairman of the board) and must be involved in the company’s operations (Article 10).

Secondly , the position of supervisor is no longer mandatory but is a choice that each of company can make based on the decision of its shareholder(s) (Article 83).

Directors and senior management may face liability towards third parties in cases of gross negligence or intentional acts.

7. Enhanced Access Rights to Corporate Documents (Article 57)

Shareholders of a LLC now have extended rights to inspect the company’s accounting vouchers, in addition to accounting books.
Meanwhile, they may appoint accounting firms, law firms and other intermediaries to review various documents, including the list of shareholders, register of shareholders, shareholders’ meeting minutes, board resolutions, supervisory board resolutions, and financial accounting reports.

In addition, the new company law allows shareholders access to all documents related to the Company’s wholly-owned subsidiaries.
For shareholders of a joint stock company, the new law grants shareholders the right to duplicate company documents, such as the list of shareholders, register of shareholders, board resolutions and supervisory board resolutions. Shareholders holding more than 3% of the company’s shares for more than 180 consecutive days may inspect the company’s accounting books and accounting documents.

8. Impact on the equity transfer (Article 84 and Article 86)

The New Company Law introduces improvements to the rules governing equity transfers in LLCs.
Consent from non-transferring shareholders is no longer required when transferring to non-shareholder parties. Instead, a written notice suffices.
This written notice shall include details such as quantity, price, method of payment, and the transfer period.
Other shareholders have a preemptive right, and those failing to respond within thirty days from the receipt of the written notice are deemed to have waived their right of first refusal.
The shareholder transferor can request the company to update the register of shareholders with a written notice, giving transferees full shareholder rights.

9. Principle of equal proportion of capital reduction (Article 224)

The new Company law establishes the equal proportion of capital reduction as the general principle for a company.
However, exceptions are possible if all shareholders of a limited liability company agree otherwise.
The new company law reinforces the obligations and liabilities of directors, supervisors, and senior Managers, such as the obligation to report competing businesses and affiliated transactions.
The new Company Law will undoubtedly bring many changes, although some are still open to interpretation.
Nevertheless, FIEs in China should carefully review these changes and start preparing for their implementation. Investors considering setting up a company in China should also be aware of upcoming changes to capital contribution requirements.

Fanny Nguyen | Linlin Zhang

 

Non-compete clauses in Singapore: Between the development of guidelines and the debate on a potential ban

The Tripartite partners (Ministry of Manpower (“MOM”), National Trades Union Congress, and Singapore National Employers Federation) are currently crafting guidelines on non-compete clauses in employment contracts, sparking speculation on a potential ban akin to the United States. The Tripartite partners aim to shape norms and offer employer guidance, but an outright ban seems unlikely. Common in Singapore, these clauses, initially meant to safeguard employers’ interests, have drawn criticism for potential exploitation. While prevalent in senior roles, they have infiltrated rank-and-file contracts, raising ethical concerns.

Non-compete durations, ranging from three months to two years, are common, particularly in industries like sales, finance, and technology. Despite criticism, the Tripartite partners stress the need for guidelines limiting non-compete use to genuine business interest protection, including trade secrets and client relationships. However, some lawyers mentioned that an American-style ban is unlikely, citing Singapore’s business-friendly environment and the requirement for legitimate and reasonable clauses.

The forthcoming guidelines lack legal power but are expected to recommend fair payment during non-compete periods and suggest maximum enforceable durations. Recommendations may also include guidance on exempt employee categories and emphasize clear communication of employment terms.

The Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (“TAFEP”) set up in 2006 by the Tripartite partners, stresses the importance of fair contracts for employer and employee protection, encouraging transparency and trust. Employees and employers are advised to consult TAFEP’s website for fair employment contract information, with unionized workers encouraged to seek union support for unreasonable clauses. 

Sources:  

https://www.mom.gov.sg/newsroom/parliament-questions-and-replies/2023/0421-written-answer-to-pq-on-inclusion-of-restraint-of-trade-clauses-in-labour-contracts 

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/non-compete-clauses-employment-contract-ban-unlikely-3541916 

Astrid Cippe | Graciane Paitard-Albin

 

New Japanese invoice system and impact on small businesses

Since 1 October 2023, Japan has implemented a new qualified invoice system requiring registration as consumption tax (“CT”) payer to be able to issue qualified invoices. As a principle, businesses are no longer entitled to deduct CT paid to suppliers who are not registered as CT payers. 

Small Japanese businesses with share capital and annual taxable income under 10 million yens will therefore face the decision to register for CT or not. These small companies are exempt from paying CT and can keep the CT proceeds they have invoiced as an additional source of income, but by doing so, they would take the risk of losing customers who will no longer be able to receive tax deductions on CT paid to them. This change has sparked concern, leading the Japanese government to introduce a transition period.  

CT was first introduced in Japan in 1989. The CT rate was raised to 10% in 2019 (or 8% for some specific goods), representing 35% of the government budget and being the first source of income in the government budget.  

Obligations under the qualified invoice system 

The main obligations of businesses under the qualified invoice system are the following.

• Issuance of Qualified Invoices upon Request:

Upon request from the buyer, sellers shall provide qualified invoices including the invoice issuer registration number, CT amount and CT rate whether in written or electronic format. It is important to highlight that qualified invoice is not necessary for deductions of payments below 10,000 yen (inclusive of CT).

• Storage of Issued Invoice Copies:

Businesses that issue qualified invoices must keep copies of them for 7 years, starting two months from the end of the business year of the invoice. Storage can be made in electronic format if it complies with the Electronic Book Storage Act.

• Payment of Consumption Tax:

Businesses that issue qualified invoices are required to declare and pay CT. There are 2 different taxation methods:

1. main taxation: the amount of CT payable as tax is calculated based on collected CT less deductible CT that was paid by the business. Businesses using this system shall store qualified invoices and adhere to the structured invoice system ledger.
2. simplified taxation: Businesses whose taxable sales amount during the base period is 50 million yen or less and who have submitted a “Consumption Tax Simplified Taxation System Selection Notification Form” in advance may opt for the simplified taxation system. The amount of CT payable as tax is calculated based on collected CT less the amount deductible based on a fixed percentage defined by business field. Businesses using this system shall store qualified invoices they have been issued, but they do not have to store invoices received from business partners.

Measures applicable during transition period

• Transition period for small companies:

To reduce the sudden increase in tax burden on small businesses, the Japanese government has implemented a transition period for exempted businesses opting for CT registration. The transition system shall apply to all business years from 1 October 2023 to 30 September 2026.

During this period, businesses are required to pay only 20% of the collected CT once they register. The 20% special provision is automatically granted upon indicating it in the final tax return, except for specific ineligible cases (e.g. taxable sales amount or share capital of 10 million yen or more etc.).

• Transition period for non-registered companies:

To reduce the sudden risks to lose clients for small companies that would choose not to register with the CT payment system, the Japanese government has implemented a transition period to allow partial deduction of CT as follows:

1. For invoices issued by a non-taxpaying entity between October 2023 and September 2026, 80% of the CT is eligible for tax deduction for the invoice receiver.
2. For invoices issued between October 2026 and September 2029, 50% of the CT is eligible for tax deduction for the invoice receiver.
3. For all invoices issued after October 2029, no tax deduction on CT will apply.

Mina Ishikawa  

 

OUR LATEST DEALS

Havas / Advertising and communications 

LPA Singapore advised Havas on its recent acquisition of Klareco Communications, Southeast Asia’s premier strategic communications consultancy based in Singapore. Havas, a global advertising and communications agency, is set to bolster its presence in the region through this strategic move. LinkedIn

Etaily / Ecommerce

LPA Singapore assisted Etaily, an ecommerce enabler in Southeast Asia, with a USD 17.8 m series A fundraising from various investors. See more

 

NEWS FROM LPA

Ranking | LPA-CGR avocats Hong Kong office has been recognized by The Legal 500 Asia Pacific 2024 edition in the Domestic and International Corporate Tax practice, achieving Tier 3. LinkedIn

Ranking | LPA-CGR avocats Shanghai office has been recognized by The Legal 500 Asia Pacific 2024 edition in the Corporate and M&A foreign firms practice, achieving Tier 5. LinkedIn

Upcoming event | Join Sabrine Cazorla Reverre, Of Counsel, Head of the Family practice at LPA Singapore, and our business partners Equance on 20 February 2024 (8:15 – 10:00 am SGT) at a conference (in French) co-organized with the French Chamber of Commerce in Singapore on the topic: “Spouse and family protection in an international context”. Our experts will deliver a comprehensive overview of the crucial legal and financial aspects related to family life. Register by clicking here

Past event | Nicolas Vanderchmitt, Managing Partner of LPA-CGR avocats Hong Kong office, had the privilege of participating in a conference organized by the French Chamber in Hong Kong, alongside other esteemed panelists, to discuss the unique investment opportunities within the Greater Bay Area. LinkedIn

Past event | Estelle Chen, Associate at the LPA-CGR avocats Shanghai office, and Emilien Vivier, Associate at the Paris office, participated alongside Equance in Hong Kong, in a conference, held in French, organized by the CCI France Chine in Shanghai on the topic: “Enjeux patrimoniaux franco-chinois : les stratégies juridiques et fiscales gagnantes”. Our experts addressed key points related to the legal and tax management of patrimony in Franco-Chinese and international contexts. LinkedIn (in French)

Past event | Lionel Vincent, Managing Partner at LPA Tokyo, had the pleasure to attend the G7 conference of Trade Ministers in Osaka in October 2023. Among the various discussions, the representatives of the G7 countries’ chamber of commerce held a side meeting on the development of foreign direct investments in the Kansai region. The event was organized by the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) and other organizations, and was attended by representatives from the G7 countries, including the USA and Germany, as well as the European Union’s Chamber of Commerce and Industry in Japan. LinkedIn

Past event | Sabrine Cazorla Reverre, Of Counsel, Head of the Family practice at LPA Singapore, co-organized with Banque Transatlantique Luxembourg and Singapore, as well as a Notary specialized in private international law, a conference,  held in French, on the theme of family and patrimonial law. The experts discussed how to invest, protect and transmit. LinkedIn (in French)

Past event | Nicolas Vanderchmitt, Managing Partner of LPA-CGR avocats Hong Kong office, and Marie-Gabrielle du Bourblanc, Counsel, co-organized with Banque Transatlantique Luxembourg, as well as CIC Conseil, a breakfast talk, held in French, on the theme : Keys to success for preparing and realizing the succession of one’s enterprise, zoom on the financial, legal, and tax aspects. LinkedIn (in French)

Past event | Lionel Vincent, Managing Partner at LPA Tokyo, had the privilege of participating in the 32nd meeting of the Club Franco-Japonais. The Club Franco-Japonais, which brings together over forty leaders from major French and Japanese companies, met with His Excellency Emmanuel Macron, President of the French Republic for a working session in November 2023 at the Elysees Palace in Paris. This annual 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 Tokyo had the honor of hosting a cocktail party & photo exhibition at LPA-CGR avocats Paris office at the occasion of the 32nd meeting of the Club Franco-Japonais on 24 November 2023. The celebration brought together over 50 esteemed guests, including members of the Club Franco-Japonais, clients, business partners, and long-standing friends. They all had the privilege of connecting and engaging in discussions related to Franco-Japanese cooperation. LinkedIn