What are the key projects that you have been involved in over the past twelve months?

I have been closely involved in a major strategic expansion of our banking activities in Japan. My role centred on designing the legal and regulatory framework for new business lines and preparing the documentation needed to support them. I translated complex regulatory requirements into practical structures, policies and processes that the business could implement, and worked with internal stakeholders to ensure that risk, compliance and operational considerations were embedded from the outset. I also drafted key agreements for new products, focusing on clarity, enforceability and operational usability. This project strengthened our presence in Japan, broadened the services we can offer clients, and created a scalable platform for future growth. It also reaffirmed the legal team’s position as a proactive, business‑minded partner that enables strategic initiatives while maintaining a disciplined approach to regulation and risk.

Please describe a situation where your advice had a significant impact on business outcomes or objectives.

A recurring situation where my advice significantly influences business outcomes is the structuring of new or adapted products. When a product is proposed, I begin by mapping the legal and regulatory landscape, then assess how similar offerings are handled globally within the group and how they fit with our existing Japanese platform. I discuss with management to understand commercial objectives, client needs and risk appetite. Combining these perspectives, I propose structures and contract terms that are compliant, aligned with group standards and practical for the local market. In several cases, this has meant suggesting alternative solutions that preserved the commercial intent while reducing legal complexity or regulatory uncertainty. As a result, we have avoided late‑stage reworks and delays, and launched products in a controlled, sustainable way. This integrated approach ensures that legal considerations support, rather than hinder, the achievement of our business objectives.

What are the key trends that in-house counsel should be monitoring over the coming months?

One key trend is the rapid evolution of artificial intelligence (AI) and legal technology. In‑house counsel should actively explore how these tools can enhance efficiency in areas such as document review, contract lifecycle management, research and knowledge sharing, while maintaining robust standards on confidentiality, data protection and quality control. At the same time, they must track how regulators, courts and counterparties address AI‑related issues, including data usage, transparency, bias and liability. These developments will increasingly shape contractual provisions, internal policies and risk management frameworks.

In this environment, it will become even more important to be a lawyer who genuinely understands the law and has sufficient practical experience to review, challenge and refine AI‑generated outputs. AI can support the work but cannot replace sound legal judgment.

Another important trend is the growing expectation for in‑house teams to act as strategic partners, not just legal gatekeepers. This means combining legal expertise with strong business understanding, clear communication and the ability to translate complex legal issues into actionable, commercially sensible advice that supports long‑term value creation.

In-house counsel increasingly play the role of ‘translator’. How do you communicate complex legal advice to the board, key stakeholders and internally?

I see my role as “translator” starting well before any written legal advice is issued. Wherever possible, I prioritise verbal communication over long email chains. By speaking directly with stakeholders, I can clarify what they are trying to achieve, what they consider essential, and where they can compromise. This ensures that, by the time I provide a formal view, we are already aligned on objectives and constraints.

I also believe that effective translation depends on trust. I work hard to be perceived as a reliable partner: knowledgeable, proactive and solution‑oriented. Rather than simply identifying risks, I try to present realistic alternatives that enable management and the business to reach their goals while mitigating those risks.

When explaining complex issues, I adjust my language to the importance and sensitivity of the matter. For higher‑risk topics, I will use professional legal terms to signal the seriousness and then restate them in clear, business‑focused language. For less critical matters, I may go directly to simple, practical explanations so that non‑lawyers can quickly understand the implications and make informed decisions.