Conference programme

This session will explore the critical challenges in-house counsels face in a rapidly changing environment and to discuss strategies for staying ahead. It aims to share with in-house counsels the knowledge and tools necessary to navigate the complexities in the modern dimensions effectively.

Asset recovery constitutes an essential component of a party’s litigation strategy. Planning for asset recovery early in the legal proceedings enables parties to minimise the risk of dissipation or concealment of assets by counterparties. This in turn increases the likelihood of a party achieving a successful litigation outcome through the recovery of rightfully owned assets. That said, asset recovery is fraught with challenges. This is especially so in the context of cross-border asset recovery where parties are required to navigate complex legal and jurisdictional hurdles that may impede the identification and tracing of assets. This session therefore seeks to address: (1) the key challenges in cross-border asset recovery; (2) the latest trends in cross-border asset recovery, including the recovery of digital assets like cryptocurrency; and (3) the way forward, including how cross-border asset recovery methods may be enhanced.

This session will explore the emerging challenging issues in tougher merger control enforcement trends globally and their impact on both international M&A transactions, together with insights on how to address such challenges and successfully closing the deals. Our panelists hailing from the US, Singapore, Japan, China and Europe will also peer into the future to address the burning question: what lies ahead?

This panel brings together capital markets practitioners and experts across Asia to discuss opportunities, challenges and market developments. Hear the panellists discuss current regulatory issues relating to the initial public offering (IPO) market in China, Hong Kong and the region, fixed-income products and new capital markets products such as tokenised and digital bonds. With the relatively higher interest rate environment, our panellists will also examine trends in the regional debt capital markets and strategies used by issuers to overcome fundraising hurdles.

Starting in 2022, Lisa Monaco, Deputy Attorney General, began describing ‘sanctions’ as ‘the new FCPA’, as a logical extension of the US federal government’s effort to use economic sanctions and trade controls to incrementally apply pressure against foreign governmental activity seen as adverse to the interests of the US. Since 2020, there has been a proliferation in US measures focused on China, including Hong Kong, in the form of primary legislation, Presidential Executive Orders and the addition of specially designated nationals (SDNs) to the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) list. China has not been the only focus, though, with sanctions issued arising out of the Russia–Ukraine war, for example. Other countries, including China, view such sanctions as generally contrary to international law. But, in addition, Canada, China, the EU and the UK, have responded by enacting their own ‘blocking statutes’, enabling domestic non-compliance with US laws and requiring notification to authorities about any US sanction enforcement measures (for example, China’s 2021 Anti-Foreign Sanctions Law). China has also imposed restrictions and requirements on provision of information offshore to assist foreign regulators. The result has been that everyone doing, and facilitating, business must navigate their way through complex, sometimes unclear and often conflicting sets of new legal requirements. All lawyers in Asia, whatever their area of practice, must have at least a clear, basic understanding of trade remedies and sanctions.

This session will address the following questions:
• What are the different forms of sanctions that have been issued and how do they work in practice? What is their scope and what are their limits?
• What is the difference between primary and secondary sanctions?
• What has been the effect, in practice, of blocking statutes?
• How do financial institutions navigate the requirements and restrictions?
• How are third-party countries and businesses affected?
• What is the potential impact on securities and other markets?
• What future developments may occur?

Statutory adjudication is designed to provide a quick, flexible and efficient means of resolving payment disputes which may otherwise delay or disrupt the completion of a construction contract. In countries which have enacted legislation for statutory adjudication such as Australia, Malaysia, New Zealand, Singapore and the United Kingdom, the statutory process has become one of the primary methods of resolution of disputes for domestic construction projects. Hong Kong has recently taken a significant step by gazetting its Construction Industry Security of Payment Bill, and once enacted, aims to serve a similar purpose as other statutory adjudication regime. At the same time, countries such as India, Japan and Korea have navigated large scale construction and infrastructure disputes without the aid of statutory adjudication. Instead, these jurisdictions rely on other modes of alternative dispute resolution for resolving construction disputes. In this session, the speakers from Hong Kong, Malaysia and Singapore will provide a comparative analysis of the statutory adjudication regime in their respective jurisdictions as well as the lessons learnt and the future of the regime. Thereafter, speakers from India, Korea and Japan will share insights into the various mechanisms available in their jurisdictions in dealing with construction disputes, the effectiveness of the same and how these have developed over the years.