The Legal 500

It has been a tempestuous few years in world markets and whilst the Scandinavian model economies have survived the worst of the downturn, bankruptcies have been prevalent and the international nature of trading patterns has exposed Norwegian companies and local authorities to disputes in courts around the globe. The banking crisis has been compounded by the financial implosion of countries such as Iceland and Greece, leaving recession-hit economies already affected by increased regulatory constraints, environmental protection measures  and enhanced solvency requirements, still struggling to sustain growth.

In this issue Hot-tubbing in International Arbitration…1 By Chia Voon Jiet Upcoming Amendments to the International Arbitration Act …………….. 3 By Chew Kiat Jinn & Mahesh Rai

Five months after the Competition Act 2010 (“Act”) came into force on 1 January 2012, the Malaysia Competition Commission (“MyCC”) has issued the final version of three guidelines (collectively, “Guidelines”) it had previously made available for public consultation last year. The Guidelines comprise of the following:

There are currently only 22 generic top level domains (gTLDs) in the world. A top level domain is the last part of a domain name (e.g. .com).

THE COMPETITION ACT

IDA ISSUES TELECOM COMPETITION CODE 2012 AND NEW TELECOM CONSOLIDATION AND TENDER OFFER GUIDELINES

Crédit Industriel et Commercial v Teo Wai Cheong [2012] SGHC 94

On 14 June 2011, the Corporate Governance Council (“Council”) issued a consultation paper with proposed revisions to the Code of Corporate Governance (“Code”). Please click here to refer to Drew & Napier LLC’s update on that consultation.

In P.T. Swakarya Indah Busana v Haniffa Pte Ltd and another [2012] SGHC 69, the Plaintiff sought to invalidate the Defendants’ 15 “Martin” formative trade marks (“the Challenged marks”) on grounds that the marks were registered in bad faith (section 7(6) read with section 23(1) of the Trade Marks Act (the “Act”), and that there was fraud in the registrations or the registrations were obtained by misrepresentation (section 23(4) of the Act).

The recent decision of the Singapore High Court (“the Court”) in the appeal of Wong Seng Kwan v Public Prosecutor [2012] SGHC 81 (“Wong”) clarifies the law relating to the obligations of a person who finds lost property (“a Finder”).

On 11 April 2012, The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) announced that it took a civil penalty enforcement action against Mr Lau Kee Swan for contravening section 201(b) of the Securities and Futures Act (SFA), which prohibits the employment of manipulative and deceptive devices in connection with the subscription, purchase or sale of securities.