Legal Updates

Legal Updates for Jun - 2018

Singapore Court of Appeal Issues Decision on Quantification of Damages
Commercial dispute practitioners know that it is not enough that a claimant prove that a breach of contract has occurred; claimants have to go further and quantify the losses that they have suffered. That legal principle was at the centre of the Singapore Supreme Court’s decision in Biofuel Industries Pte Ltd v V8 Environmental Pte Ltd [2018] SGCA 28, an important case clarifying the evidential threshold to be met by claimants when quantifying their losses. Here, the damages awarded against the defendant were successfully reduced to a nominal sum. The defendant was represented by Jared Kok of Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP, assisted by Jared Dass.
28 Jun 2018 | Singapore

Indonesian Customs Recordation: Ready for Implementation

The Minister of Finance has issued Regulation No. 40/PMK.04/2018 regarding Customs Recordation, Preventive Measure, Guarantee, Suspension, Monitoring and Evaluation on import and export control of Goods suspected of infringing Intellectual Property Rights ("MFR No. 40/2018"). MFR No. 40/2018, which comes into operation this month, implements Government Regulation No. 20 of 2017 on Import and Export control for Goods suspected of infringing Intellectual Property Rights.

26 Jun 2018 | Indonesia

New Completion Target on the Amendment of the Indonesian Competition Law

The amendment process of Law No. 5 of 1999 on the Prohibition of Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Competition ("ICL") started 2 years ago, but the process was delayed due to the selection procedure of the KPPU’s commissioners for the office term of 2018-2023 (Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha (“KPPU”)-the Indonesian Competition Authority). The House of Representatives ("DPR") has refocused its agenda on the amendment of ICL following the appointment of KPPU’s commissioners.  Based on DPR’s schedule, the amendment should be finalised on 19 July and will be promulgated shortly after.

25 Jun 2018 | Indonesia

The Law on Cybersecurity

On 12 June 2018, the National Assembly passed the Law on Cybersecurity (the "Law"). The Law regulates activities in protecting national security and ensuring social order and safety in cyberspace. Previous regulations on the subject had been scattered throughout different pieces of legislation, such as the Law on Information Technology, Law on Cyber-Information Security, Law on Telecommunications, Law on E-Transactions and the Penal Code.  The Law applies to local and foreign agencies, organisations and individuals who provide services in cyberspace or own any information systems, and are related to cybersecurity activities in Vietnam. The scope of cyberspace covers a network of IT infrastructure, and includes telecommunications networks, internet networks, computer systems, information and processing and control systems and databases. The Law will come into effect from 1 January 2019.

25 Jun 2018 | Vietnam

Singapore Court Rejects Application to Adjourn Enforcement Proceedings Pending Setting Aside Challenge in Arbitral Seat
In Man Diesel & Turbo SE v I.M. Skaugen Marine Services Pte Ltd [2018] SGHC 132, the Singapore High Court considered whether it should adjourn proceedings to enforce an arbitral award pending the determination of proceedings challenging the award in Denmark, being the seat of the arbitration. It is understood that this is the first time the Singapore Court has elaborated on the test to be applied when dealing with an application for adjournment and a cross-application for security. Danny Ong, Yam Wern-Jhien and Annabelle Teo of Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP successfully represented the Plaintiff in these proceedings.
21 Jun 2018 | Singapore

The Duties of an Adjudicator in a SOPA Payment Claim Dispute
In Comfort Management Pte Ltd v OGSP Engineering Pte Ltd [2018] SGCA 19, the Singapore Court of Appeal set out to better define the role of the adjudicator in the SOPA process, including the scope of his duties in an adjudication, and the matters which he has to consider in making a determination. The Court also considered the situation where the respondent does not file a payment response, asking whether the respondent is precluded from challenging the payment claim before the adjudicator, and whether the adjudicator must automatically find in favour of the claimant.
01 Jun 2018 | Singapore