Raj Barot

Hong Kong partner Byron Phillips talks AI to BRG, advising companies to “…apply the most stringent frameworks and work backward….it is important to have the tools to be compliant, and then you can loosen and innovate accordingly.” Click here to read the report: https://lnkd.in/g6mF7E9X Click here to learn more about Byron’s practice: https://lnkd.in/gBhH5gHV

2

Nice and early start to a Monday morning, at Personal Data Protection Week in Singapore. Minister Josephine Teo on Singapore’s approach to data privacy and AI governance: Proactive, Protective and Pragmatic. 3 initiatives that Singapore will launch, with a notable focus on generative AI: > A set of guidelines will be consulted on and issued for generative AI model app development, which will center on transparency and testing. (There will be safety and trustworthy attributes, covering hallucination, biased content etc.) > Singapore’s privacy enhancing technologies (PETs) sandbox will be expanded to data use for generative AI. (Synthetic data sets will be used in lieu of sensitive personal data.) > An ASEAN guide on data anonymisation will be released in 2025. #data #ai #genai #trust #innovation #singapore #asean #asia #global #privacy #personaldata #law #policy #international #tech #apps

115

15 Comments

In the hallowed halls of Singaporean justice, a stark imbalance exists. While the principle of equality before the law is enshrined, the reality for self-litigants paints a different picture. This essay will explore the inherent unfairness of solely compensating legal costs, especially when faced with wealthy opponents who weaponize their financial advantage to drain a person's resources and force them into self-litigation. It will further delve into the absurdity of denying compensation for the self-litigant's time, simply because... they lack the formal title of a lawyer?  The scenario is all too common: a wealthy individual or corporation uses their financial might to first bankrupt their opponent, ensuring they can no longer afford legal representation. Then, with a patronizing air, they accuse the self-litigant of choosing to represent themselves, as if it were a leisurely choice rather than a desperate necessity. The opponent's exorbitant legal fees, often dwarfing the actual claim, are deemed perfectly reasonable. Yet, the self-litigant's request for compensation for their time, their tireless efforts to defend themselves, is dismissed as preposterous.   This double standard is a slap in the face of justice and State Courts of Singapore. It perpetuates the notion that the time and expertise of a self-litigant hold no value, simply because they lack the official designation of a lawyer. It's a system that favors the wealthy, allowing them to exhaust their opponents through endless litigation, knowing they can recoup their legal costs while the self-litigant faces financial ruin.   The argument that compensating a self-litigant's time is unfair because they are not professional lawyers is not only illogical but also discriminatory. It harkens back to a time when access to justice was the privilege of the elite, a stark contrast to the modern ideals of equality and fairness. Should a self-litigant, forced into that position by their opponent's machinations, be penalized for lacking a title? Is their time, their knowledge, their relentless fight for justice any less valuable?   The fact that this discrimination can be based on race, nationality, gender, or orientation adds another layer of injustice. It creates a system where certain individuals are inherently disadvantaged, their voices stifled, their rights denied.   https://l.Nansen.id/YoJZFv

4

2 Comments

If you have noticed this curious sight of people doing broad jumps and lungees at the gym, this is because Hyrox, a fitness event has taken over segments of the population. The company/event appears wildly successful, with participants paying to take part or even watch others in a circuit of running and strength exercises. But this contagion effect isn’t new – a few years back, the spartan race gave us the comical sight of people (some of which were completely out of shape) doing an obstacle course. The Stan Chart marathon also produced similar mania with many signing up just to get a participant’s T shirt. All of this makes for interesting social observations, some of which are well articulated in Malcom Gladwell’s aptly titled book, the “Tipping Point”. Time and time again, the formula for a contagion effect repeats itself. Fitness in itself isn’t intrinsically infectious – it requires effort and commitment. But the prevalence of fitness trends across different segments of society (most pronounced with millennials) is certainly higher today than ever before, which creates social connectors to spread the trend. The ability to spread a trend has been supercharged by social media, creating a loop where visible representations of the trends (logos, ads, people doing lunges/broad jumps), only reinforces the ever-snowballing loop. These repeated triggers can give an outsized impression of how prevalent the trend truly is, creating the true tipping point because out of all of our human instincts – tribalism, conformity, social currency etc, the fear of missing out is the most powerful. All in all, a trend that makes you fitter you should be commended but there are 2 takeaways to this story: 1. The true value of physical training or any physical effort is not how we look in the end, or having medals or our names on some board – the true value of exercise is in doing something you might not want to do consistently. Each time, someone shows up at a gym or a running track, they have won a pivotal battle with themselves, to force themselves to do something they don’t want. And if there is one skill in life that will serve you, it will be just that: conditioning to performing tasks you don’t want to. 2. People might mistake fitness to be driver of such trends, but it isnt. Bhutan's Snowman Trek largely considered the most difficult trek in the world has never really caught on despite the physical endurance required. An exercise meant for elite individuals will never become a trend because it doesn't contain the ingredients for contagion embedded in our human instincts. https://lnkd.in/g964jGMd

15

A lot of jurisdictions already recognise same sex marriage, but Hong Kong is not one of them. However, a lot of people have this misconception that gays and lesbians do not need to get legally married. This cannot be more wrong because of the history of Hong Kong in its jurisprudence on this subject. In short, it is very important for couple to get married, even though they cannot get married in Hong Kong. If you are not married, you cannot expect to be protected by the Hong Kong laws. If you are married, even if your marriage is not recognised by Hong Kong laws, you can still get some legal protection. It sounds unnecessarily complicated, but “it is what it is”. To celebrate pride month, I will be talking about LGBT and their legal challenges, including the history, the current situation, the legal issues in reality and how to address them. Meanwhile, if you want to get married but do not know how to (or where to), ask me and I will point you to the right direction. #LGBTrights #PrideMonth #Equality #Diversity #Inclusion

69

2 Comments

In a competitive market, I'd like to think that technical expertise and sharing of knowledge is one way to differentiate. In that regard, in addition to regular articles and speaking engagements, Appleby Hong Kong can offer: (a) a series of presentations on a wide range of topics -many in English, Cantonese or Mandarin. It may be possible for these to qualify for CPD. Online or in-person delivery may be available. (b) A regular "Appleby Asia Alert". (c) a series of podcasts "Appleby Asia Talks" available on www.applebyglobal.com (d) an ongoing series of "Appleby Trust Talks" on 9 topics (recordings available). Topics thus far: 1. Trustees of foreign law trusts 2. PTCs 3. Crown Dependencies 4. Beneficial ownership registers 5. Sanctions 6. Trust jurisdictional comparison 7. Regulatory issues 8. Precedents - Are yours fit for purpose(s)? 9. Family offices and offshore jurisdictions Please contact me or your usual Appleby contact for more details. #podcasts #webinars #seminars

13

If I were to issue an NFT by tokenizing an art work, this would be it. 🖼️ As a disputes lawyer, my crypto expertise was very much limited to recovering stolen tokens (unfortunately very common) and resolving disputes amongst founders/investors (also common). It involved persuading the Singapore courts and enforcement agencies to extend old-fashioned law to cover a new asset class of crypto assets in a myriad of new situations. Legal questions I deal with: How do I obtain a court order to get exchanges to freeze stolen crypto assets? How do I persuade the police that they have a duty to investigate a crypto theft due to the various connecting factors to Singapore? How do I get a party in breach to perform the SAFT? 👨‍⚖️   Ask me anything else technical about crypto and it was just question marks. ❓     So I was delighted to have interacted with and learnt so much from the diverse parts of the crypto ecosystem at TOKEN2049 Week earlier this month: founders, investors, builders, miners, financing people, security people, exchanges, social media platforms, gaming, art, key opinion leaders, wallets, and traders. Someone sent me the Bitcoin white paper, explained the concepts of staking, layer 2, cross-chain bridges, DAO, proof of work vs proof of stake, security audits etc. I even received investment advice on a crypto portfolio. 💰 Based on my interactions, it is not an exaggeration to say that the brightest minds are in this exciting space. 👩‍🎓    While my crypto expertise comes in handy only when things go wrong, I have new-found appreciation for my corporate colleagues in my firm who are market leaders in crypto. The practice has extensive experience advising on everything crypto: analyzing business frameworks, establishing crypto exchanges, crypto-staking programs, token offering etc, any part of the crypto ecosystem and life-cycle you name it. PM me if you would like me to link you up with them. 🖇️ PS: I did not tell the gifted artist who sketched me by hand (completed in 5 minutes) what I do for a living. And I certainly wasn't holding any props. But he looked deeply into my soul and immediately saw that I was the kind of person who tracks down stolen crypto assets with a firearm or fixes problems by some form of duel/combat. Pretty accurate. 🔫       #TOKEN2049 #TokenWeek #crypto #cryptodisputes #Blockchain #Decentralization #TradFi #AssetTokenization #Tokenization #Innovation #Web3 #digitalassets #cryptohacks #cryptocrime

53

In the recent decision of Re Primlaks (H.K.) Ltd (in Liquidation) [2024] HKCFI 752, the Hong Kong court held that in adjudicating proofs of debt based on a default judgment, a liquidator may go behind the judgment in the event of fraud, collusion or miscarriage of justice. Where a proof of debt is based on a default judgment, the ground of miscarriage of justice is particularly relevant since a default judgment involves a one-sided presentation of facts, the objectivity and accuracy of which could be subject to challenge or further scrutiny. In particular, the court held that the liquidator need not challenge the judgment prior to looking behind it. In this case, the court found it sufficiently clear that the liquidators’ case was based on an alleged miscarriage of justice in a default judgment. The court agreed with the liquidators that there was good reason that the default judgment ought not to have been granted. The petitioner failed to introduce sufficient evidence to discharge their burden of proving that the alleged loans were genuine debts. Furthermore, the available contemporaneous documents show information that directly contradicted the petitioner's claim. As such, the liquidator's decision to reject the petitioner's claim was confirmed and dismissed the petitioner's application with costs. Read more here: https://lnkd.in/ge_sB6Rv The views expressed in the article belong solely to the author(s) of the article and does not necessarily represent the views of INSOL or INSOL Asia Hub. All content presented on LinkedIn by INSOL Asia is for the benefit and interest of the restructuring and insolvency community, and for general informational purposes only, and INSOL makes no representations as to the accuracy or completeness of any information contained in the article. INSOL posts do not constitute legal advice. Credits: Dentons Hong Kong LLP, Keith Brandt, Henry Li #insolvency #restructuring #hongkong

16

After the Financial Services and the Treasury Bureau (FSTB) and the Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) jointly released the consultation conclusions regarding the regulatory regime for stablecoinissuers in Hong Kong, the HKMA has also announced the first three participants for the stablecoin issuer sandbox. We are excited to see the development of regulatory guidance over the stablecoin issuance in Hong Kong, and we have prepared the analysis over the consultation conclusions and the next steps. #stablecoin #sandbox #hkma #fstb #virtualassets #crypto #regulation #JunHe

38

AI is making a real impact for lawyers and the legal industry in Singapore by giving them time back to focus on higher-value work. It was great to be part of this article with Lianhe Zaobao 联合早报 covering the transformation of the profession which really ramped up this year. As just one of many examples, the teams at Rajah & Tann Asia are using Copilot to draft case documents, summarise legal opinions, and capture meeting notes, saving up to 30% of their time. This allows them to dedicate more energy to complex case strategy, client relationships, and meaningful problem-solving. With Microsoft AI, the future of legal work is here, and it’s smarter, faster, and focused on what truly matters. As part of our AI Pinnacle Program we’re excited to continue this journey of transformation with even more industries in Singapore in the year ahead. #microsoftsingapore #AIPinnacleprogram #GenAI, #microsoftcopilot Andrea Della Mattea Jeth Lee Mike Yeh Vincent Wong Joanna Lim Justin Chan Lynn Yang Zoe Knobel Cynthia Yeo Sook Huey Wong Sidney Lim Chin Chin Leong Weng Pui Lam Vivek Chatrath Joey Tan Juan Madera Zaid Alkadhi https://lnkd.in/g4ikRfsC [English: "AI simplifies complexity and saves time, and lawyers are still the protagonists with their hearts and brains"]

75

1 Comment

[可能得我覺得有趣XD] The Calm Before the Storm Typically, the weather before a typhoon is calm, but this can change drastically. A Typhoon Signal No. 8 is expected in HK this afternoon. I recently came across an interesting news that I thought would be nice to share before we leave the office to prepare for the impending storm. Yusuf Dikec's Trademark Move Yusuf Dikec, Turkish Olympic pistol silver medal winner, has taken an important step to safeguard his iconic shooting pose that gained global attention during the Paris Games. He has officially submitted a trademark application for this pose to the Turkish Patent and Trademark Office (TURKPATENT). [source: https://shorturl.at/Haadv]. Dikec’s coach, Erdinc Bilgili, confirmed this decision noting that it was prompted by the discovery of several unauthorized attempts to register the trademark without Dikec's knowledge. The viral popularity of Dikec’s pose has led to the production of various merchandise featuring his likeness. However, even with a registered trademark, there may still be competing applications that attempt to imitate logos that are confusingly similar. A well-known example is the “Jumpman” logo associated with Michael Jordan. In 2020, Jordan won a long-standing legal battle (for nearly a decade!) against Qiaodan Sports Co., Ltd. in China, where the Supreme People’s Court ruled to revoke the trademark for “Qiaodan and Device” (Qiaodan is the Chinese transliteration of Jordan). Silhouette Trademarks Registration Can you think of other silhouette trademarks? James Bond certainly comes to mind. How about the victory pose of Usain Bolt? Regarding the registration of a "pose" as a trademark in HK, according to Section 3(2) of the Hong Kong Trademark Ordinance ("HKTMO"), "... a trade mark may consist of words (including personal names), indications, designs, letters, characters, numerals, figurative elements, colours, sounds, smells, the shape of goods or their packaging and any combination of such signs." According to Section 11(1)(b) of the HKTMO, one of the absolute grounds for refusing trademark registration is a lack of distinctiveness. Therefore, it is crucial to evaluate whether a trademark, including silhouette trademarks, possesses sufficient distinctiveness before applying for registration. If the mark is deemed distinctive, it has a higher chance to be registered (subject to relative grounds). The challenge lies in determining who will be the first to file an application to register that "pose" as a trademark. (note: The first-to-file trademark system is the approach adopted by the majority of countries worldwide, including China, most EU nations, and the UK. ) The athletes and their managers may underestimate the value of intellectual property rights associated with something as simple as a pose during a sporting event. Before the storm arrives, it's wise to seek out a good shelter, wouldn’t you agree? Secure your trademarks before someone else does! #trademark #IPrights

23

2 Comments

In a notable decision by the Singapore High Court on 24 October 2024, Kim Dang Dang Pte Ltd v RegalRare Gem Museum Pte Ltd (in liquidation) [2024] SGHC 275, Justice Goh Yihan ordered the termination of the winding up of RegalRare Gem Museum Pte Ltd, highlighting the court's discretion under Section 186(1) of the Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act 2018. This case underscores the balance of interests between creditors, the liquidator, contributories, and the public interest in the decision to terminate a company's winding up. The Court emphasised the importance of considering the creditors' attitudes, the liquidator's interests, the contributories' consent, the public interest, the company's solvency, and compliance with statutory duties. The decision to terminate the winding up was based on the satisfaction that all creditors' interests were protected, the liquidator's expenses were covered, shareholders committed to supporting financial obligations, and there was no adverse impact on commercial morality or public interest. Additionally, measures were taken to prevent future statutory non-compliance. The case serves as a significant reference for understanding the legal framework and judicial approach to the termination of company windings up in Singapore, which ensures that the interests of all parties, including future creditors and the public, are taken into account. #insolvency #windingup #terminate winding up Nigel Pereira Darren Low

13

Have you wondered how much power is required to keep your social media accounts running? Or what is really powering cloud- computing? This article from The Economist shares interesting steps taken by the tech giants particularly towards garnering clean energy.   Cloud computing and AI needs vast amount of electricity. JPMorgan Chase calculates that Microsoft, Alphabet, Meta consumed 90 terawatt-hours (TWh) of electricity in 2022, as much as Colombia. Yes, that’s a lot! So, the tech titans don’t just need a lot of power, they also want theirs to be clean. Microsoft and Brookfield recently announced a deal to build 10.5GW of renewable capacity in America and Europe by 2030. The arrangement is meant to enable Microsoft to meet its pledge to have 100% of its electricity use, 100% of the time, come from zero carbon sources by 2030. One problem is that data centers tend to consume power at a steady rate, including when the sun is not shining nor the wind blowing. So tech firms are also thinking of ways to make data-processing more flexible… It involves a combination of microgrids (which can run independently but also exchange energy with others nearby), batteries and advanced software in order to enable shifting less time- sensitive tasks, such as training AI models, to periods of fallow demand. Google, meanwhile, is dabbling in geothermal energy. It has signed the first- ever corporate deal to develop “enhanced” geothermal power with Fervo. Google, Microsoft and Nucor have announced that they will aggregate demand and jointly offer contracts to clean-energy project, both early-stage commercial ones and entirely novel “first-of-a-kind” ventures. Sam Altman has invested in Helion, a nuclear-fusion startup, and Exowatt, a startup developing solar modules that can act as both electricity generators and thermal-storage batteries. All these wagers may seem fanciful. Then again, 18 months ago so did the idea that ab AI would write essays or paint like a human. Copyright owned by Economist Newspaper Limited.   https://lnkd.in/dEVB2t8v

11

#SingaporeWashing vs. #SingaporeStamping Since FT published an article and coined the term "Singapore Washing" to depict the trend of foreign companies (in particular, Chinese companies) coming to Singapore to establish a presence to access other markets (think ByteDance and SHEIN), there has been follow up stories on this "phenomenon". I share an article in which I commented on this trend, but really, this is not what the media has made it out to be. First, I should point out that I personally do not fancy the term “Singapore-washing”, as it denotes a sinister, or even criminal element to the phenomenon of foreign companies setting up a HQ or RHQ in Singapore to gain access to other markets (think "money-laundering" and "green-washing"). I would instead prefer the term "Singapore-stamping" (giving a Singapore stamp of approval ) or "Singapore-pivoting" (using Singapore to pivot to other markets). Second, the tactic (if I may use the term "tactic") of incorporating a Singapore company to venture into other markets has various benefits from the the tax and free-trade perspectives, given the numerous FTAs and DTAs that Singapore has entered into. That Singapore is the world's third largest financial centre, has a strong rule of law, is stable economically and politically are other key factors. These are what the Singapore government has worked very hard for over the years to build the reputation that Singapore enjoys now, and the attraction of foreign companies to set up shop in Singapore is part of our growth story. So there is nothing sinister or wrong about setting up a corporate entity in Singapore to venture out. There is no "washing" involved as in "money-laundering"; the businesses that incorporate Singapore entities have legitimate businesses. Most of them merely want to use Singapore as a platform to gain better access to other markets, as using Singapore may be more advantageous than if they used the entities from their home countries. There is nothing to hide, or wash or launder.  The focus is on Chinese businesses coming to Singapore, but there are numerous non-Chinese companies setting up shop in Singapore as well - Dyson's global HQ is in Singapore; Google, Meta, 3M, FedEx, Rolls Royce... the list goes on. What do you think of this trend? Have you encountered this in your own practice? Would be curious to learn more from my LinkedIn network. Links in comments below to the FT article that spawned this debate, and relevant articles on global MNCs (other than Chinese) using Singapore as the base. #Singapore #business #FinancialHub #GlobalHQ 20240805

51

7 Comments

Hong Kong law firm CFN Lawyers has hired veteran dispute resolution lawyer Bonita Chan as a partner from Anthony Siu & Co, which operates in association with the PRC’s Jia Yuan Law Office. The move is aimed at strengthening CFN’s cross-border commercial dispute expertise, the firm told ALB. Chan brings to CFN Lawyers over 25 years of experience in complex commercial litigation and arbitration, focusing on cross-border disputes. Her expertise spans areas including corporate and shareholder conflicts, employment, banking and securities-related litigation, complex commercial crime and contentious regulatory matters and SFC investigation. Over her career, Chan has represented multinational corporations, financial institutions, and high-net-worth individuals in high-stakes cases across various jurisdictions. "With solid and extensive experiences in litigation and arbitration, particularly involving cross-border commercial disputes, Bonita brings a wealth of knowledge and expertise that will enhance our capabilities and strengthen our commitment to providing exceptional legal services to our clients,” the firm said. 🔗Sarah Wong has more details: https://lnkd.in/gJkXpecx

27

2 Comments

De Facto Directorship Claims Against Former CEO of Chinachem Dismissed Chen Vincent led by Bernard Man SC (and appearing together with Ian Yu), represented the successful Defendant (“Hui”) in securing the dismissal of the Plaintiff’s (“SW”) claims that Hui breached his fiduciary duties and duty to exercise reasonable care, skill and diligence owed to SW in Shown Wai Investment Company Limited v Hui Yip Wing David (許業榮) [2024] HKCFI 1477. The amount of damages claimed is substantial, ie over HKD 310 million. SW is a member of the Chinachem Group (“Group”) and a subsidiary of Chime Corporation Limited (“Chime”). Hui was previously the General Manager and CEO of the Group and a director of Chime. Hui introduced to the Group a potential investment opportunity in the development of a property in Foshan (“Transaction”). After completion of the Transaction, Hui was formally appointed as a director of SW. The Group later exited the Transaction at a loss. SW claimed that although Hui was only formally appointed as a director of SW on 28 December 2009, he was a de facto director of SW at all material times before then due to (inter alia) his leading role in the Transaction negotiations and taking up of responsibilities at least equivalent to those of a director of SW. Hui therefore owed fiduciary duties and/or a duty of care to SW. The Court found that SW’s case against Hui is not proved: (1) There was no sufficient basis to say Hui was a de facto director of SW before 28 December 2009. Everything done by Hui before then was to discharge his duties as Chime’s director, the Group’s General Manager and/or as an authorized representative, and nothing he did could be done only as a de facto director of SW. Chime and SW both had properly-functioning boards and Hui did not individually assume any responsibility to SW. (2) Hui had not breached his duties owed to SW after becoming a de jure director by failing to procure SW to withdraw from the Transaction. There was no evidence that the directors of Chime and SW would have agreed to this, and as a matter of commercial sense, withdrawal would adversely impact the Group’s goodwill. (3) Based on the evidence, there was no real possibility that Hui breached the “no conflict rule” and the Court was satisfied that Hui made sufficient disclosure. (4) There was sufficient reason for Hui to view the Transaction favourably, and no basis to claim he failed to act in the Group’s best interest or exercise reasonable care and skill. (5) In respect of SW’s claim for damages, there is insufficient evidence proving causation as pleaded by SW. SW also had not reasonably mitigated its loss and damage. Link to judgment: https://lnkd.in/gtm_xhAz Link to Vincent’s profile: https://lnkd.in/gwr-kQgp #bernacchichambers #hongkonglaw #companylaw  

21