The Thai Civil Court has ruled that the controversial Regulation 29, which allowed the cessation of internet service to those disseminating content that “may instigate fear among the people,” violated the right to freedom of speech in the Thai Constitution.

With the latest wave of COVID-19 continuing to have a serious impact on Thailand, many businesses have been looking for ways to survive. Some have temporarily reduced employees’ wages, while others have resorted to a complete or partial halt to operations. In these unprecedented circumstances, it is vital that business owners understand the legal criteria and steps for implementing a temporary cessation of operations in Thailand, as outlined in this article. Any business can apply for a temporary cessation of operations under section 75 of the Labor Protection Act (LPA) if there is a necessity and a significant cause, such as the business being unable to operate as usual, and if the necessity is not considered force majeure under Thai law. (If it is deemed force majeure, an employer may be able to withhold all wages—more on this below.) If these criteria are met, the employer can choose whether to seek temporary cessation of operations on a whole or partial basis, depending on the actual situation and necessity. The employer then has to inform a labor inspection officer and the employees at least three business days in advance of the intended cessation of operations. Once this is done, operations may be halted, but the employer must pay employees at least 75 percent of their wages, calculated based on the rate on their latest working day, and these payments must continue throughout the entire cessation period. “Necessity” and force majeure Though the LPA does not indicate what qualifies as a “necessity” allowing an employer to call for a temporary cessation, past rulings from the Supreme Court provide some guidance on this issue. For instance, reduced purchase orders from customers and financial difficulties faced by the employer can amount to a situation of “necessity.” Additionally, the situation has to be significant and must seriously impact

Introduction Currently, under Vietnam’s Law on Intellectual Property of 2005, as amended in 2009 and 2019 (“IP Law”), secret prior art cannot be used in evaluating patent applications. However, an approach to evaluate secret prior art has been included, for the first time, in the draft amendment of the IP Law. Below is our discussion of this interesting topic. Recognition in Other Jurisdictions Secret prior art is the name given to prior art that, at the time of filing of a new patent application, was not discoverable by the new applicant or not publicly available. It exists as a filed but unpublished application, unavailable to the public until publication. Until that point, only the applicants and the patent examiners of the unpublished application know of its existence. Even though it is not discoverable or available to the public, secret prior art can still be used as a bar for novelty in many jurisdictions. Secret prior art is not limited to situations in which the first applicant and the new applicant are different people; secret prior art applies regardless. There is, however, a domestic limitation: Applications filed and not yet published in a foreign country are not considered to be secret prior art. When the applicants are different people, the new applicant has no way of discovering the secret prior art that exists as a filed and unpublished application of the first applicant. Regardless of the completeness of the patent search, the previously filed and unpublished application cannot be discovered. At the time of filing, the new applicant’s invention would seem novel. Later, it would be discovered that the application was actually filed after another application for the same invention, barring patentability. This creates confusion and unfairness among multiple applicants. One applicant can also file two separate applications at different times, in which the later

As Vietnam continues to fight the latest wave of the Covid-19 pandemic with strict social distancing measures, the Intellectual Property Office of Vietnam (IP Office) has issued Notice No. 7581/TB-SHTT dated August 2, 2021 (Notice 7581), extending certain deadlines for IP applicants. The contents of Notice 7581 are similar to those found in Notice 5277 issued in March 2020 during the first wave of the pandemic. Specifically, Notice 7581 reads as follows: All procedures related to procedures to establish industrial property rights (priority claims, supplementation of documents, responses to the IP Office’s decisions/notifications, renewal and extension of the validity of protection titles, payment of fees and charges, and filing of appeal petitions) falling due during the period from June 30, 2021, to the end of August 31, 2021, will automatically be extended to the end of September 30, 2021. For other cases, if an applicant is still affected by the Covid-19 epidemic with regard to the implementation of its rights and obligations in the procedures for establishing rights to industrial property objects at the IP Office, such applicant may request [the IP Office] to apply the clauses on objective obstacles and force majeure as set out in Points 9.4 and 9.5 of Circular No. 01/2007/TT-BKHCN, as amended and supplemented by Circular No. 16/2016/TT-BKHCN. Observations on the Content of Notice 7581 As with last year’s Notice 5277, it is worth noting that the wording of Notice 7581 covers only the procedures to “establish industrial property rights,” rather than all aspects of industrial property rights. Further, it could be understood that it provides a closed list of industrial property procedures that can enjoy this grace period, and that the deadline extensions would apply only to the specific items listed. Thus, it is uncertain if the deadline extension to September 30, 2021, will also be automatically

Lawyers from Tilleke & Gibbins’ Bangkok office have authored the Thailand chapter of the 2021 edition of Chambers & Partners Aviation Finance & Leasing Guide. John Frangos, partner and deputy director of Tilleke & Gibbins’ dispute resolution practice; Santhapat Periera, partner in the firm’s corporate and commercial department; and Nuanchun Somboonvinij, senior associate in the firm’s dispute resolution group, provided the Thailand update for the publication, which covers the most important legal developments affecting aircraft lessors, lessees, and financiers in 32 jurisdictions worldwide. The guide provides in-depth details on the legal regimes affecting all aspects of aircraft sale and purchase, aircraft and engine leasing, and aircraft debt finance, including sale and lease agreement terms; taxation; lease registration and enforcement; lease assignment/novation; insurance and reinsurance; debt structuring; securities; liens; and many others that affect the day-to-day operations of leading players in the aviation industry. Chambers and Partners’ Global Practice Guides provide in-house counsel with expert legal commentary focusing on practical legal issues affecting business, and enable readers to compare legislation and relevant procedures across a range of key jurisdictions. The full Chambers & Partners Aviation Finance & Leasing Guide—including the Thailand chapter—is available for free on the Chambers and Partners website, and the Thailand chapter be downloaded as a stand-alone PDF through the button below.

Lawyers from Tilleke & Gibbins’ labor and employment team including Kien Trung Trinh, Sarah Galeski, and Nam Ngoc Trinh have written the Vietnam chapter of Practical Law’s Employment and Employee Benefits Global Guide. The 2021 edition of the handbook provides a high-level comparative overview of employment laws and regulations across 32 jurisdictions around the world. Tilleke & Gibbins also contributed the Myanmar chapter of the guide. The Vietnam chapter covers a wide range of typical employment matters, such as limitations on working hours, paid leave requirements, minimum wage, and health and safety obligations. In addition, the guide provides insight on a number of topics of special interest to foreign investors doing business in Vietnam, including the following: Mandatory contents of a labor contract; Visas and permits required for expatriate employees; Employers’ obligations for protecting employees’ privacy and personal data; Procedural requirements for the dismissal of an employee; Employer and parent company liability. The 2021 edition also includes a special section on Covid-19 related provisions of labor law. To read the Vietnam chapter, click on the link below.

A 13-year extension of the least developed country transition period for applying the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights has long-term implications for Southeast Asia’s least developed nations.

Although still classified as a narcotic in Laos, there are positive indications that cannabis is moving toward legalization for medical and industrial purposes in the jurisdiction, potentially providing a significant economic boon in future.