You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

November 3, 2015

Cambodia: Franchising Regulation Develops

Subscribe to Updates
Managing Intellectual Property

Cambodia has attracted an increasing number of regional and international franchise businesses. Most of these franchises are in the restaurant and service sectors, and include well-known names such as Costa Coffee, Dairy Queen, Gloria Jean’s Coffees, KFC, The Pizza Company, Ya Kun Coffee & Toast, and Sarpinos Pizza, to name a few.

Although a number of franchise businesses are operating in Cambodia, there is currently no legal framework governing franchising in the country, and the laws that do apply (e.g., trademark law and contract law) do not restrict franchising structures and allow parties to generally contract as they desire.

Section 52 of the Law Concerning Marks, Trade Names and Acts of Unfair Competition requires all license agreements that relate to registered marks to be recorded. Currently, there is a recordal process to record license and franchise agreements with the Department of Intellectual Property Rights (DIPR) under the Ministry of Commerce in Cambodia.

If a license agreement is not recorded with the DIPR, the license agreement will still be valid and enforceable between the licensor and licensee. However, the drawback of not recording the license agreement is that it will not have any effect against third parties. In addition, the failure to record a license agreement may:

  • bar a claim for damages and accounts of profits;
  • bar the use of marks inuring for benefit of the licensor, and may make marks vulnerable to cancellation for non-use;
  • prevent a licensee from participating in any infringement proceedings before the registry or bringing those proceedings; and
  • preclude the licensee from having rights to enforce against infringement.

A draft Law on Commercial Contract (Draft Law) is being contemplated which would guide contractual relations, including franchises, if enacted. The Draft Law also requires franchise agreements to be registered with the relevant authorities in order to be enforceable against third parties.

The Draft Law broadly requires franchise agreements to set forth the respective obligations and rights of the parties to the franchise; the provisions relevant to the use by the franchisee of the franchisor’s intellectual property rights, logo, store sign, or other distinguishing identification; and the provisions related to quality control, as well as duration, terms, and termination of the franchise agreement.

In view of the Draft Law, it is recommended to record a franchise agreement because registration has evidentiary value in the event of a dispute, and it allows franchise owners to enforce their rights against third parties. Moreover, Cambodian courts give substantial credit to official records of documents over unrecorded agreements.

Under the current practice, a short-form trademark license agreement arising from the franchise agreement may be submitted for recordal. The short-form trademark license agreement should contain relevant terms such as the marks being licensed, rights of the parties, terms, and so forth. A recent Notification on License Contract and Franchise Contract from the Ministry of Commerce, dated March 12, 2015, provides that any applicants seeking recordal of their licensing agreement or franchise contract with the DIPR must submit the following documents:

  1. An original form of request as provided in the Notification.
  2. A franchise agreement signed by the parties and witnesses. (This does not need to be submitted if short-form licenses are recorded.)
  3. Short-form licenses, if any, signed by the trademark owner in favor of the franchisor. A Khmer translation of this agreement must be submitted.
  4. Certificate(s) of trademark registration issued by the DIPR.
  5. A notarized power of attorney in case the parties choose to appoint an attorney in the matter.
  6. Other documents that may be requested on a case-by-case basis.

Under the current practice, the DIPR requires franchise agreements and license agreements to be translated into Khmer, and these translations must be certified by public notaries. Qualified translators may be Cambodian qualified lawyers, notaries public, trademark agents, or licensed translation companies.

For franchise agreements that relate to registered trademarks with the DIPR, the recordal process can be completed within two months or so from the date of submission. An official fee of USD 30 must be paid for recordation. Once recorded, the DIPR will issue a “Certificate of Recordal” to the applicant. However, a recordal will remain pending if the intellectual property rights have not yet been registered (including where the trademark application is pending).

With the advent of the ASEAN Economic Community and the implementation of regional economic integration, Cambodia should continue to grow as an increasingly attractive market for franchisors. Potential new market entrants should closely monitor the progress of the draft Law on Commercial Contract and its practical implementation in the country.

Download Full Article
Related Professionals

Practices

Corporate/M&A

Intellectual Property

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

August 20, 2026
Vietnam’s Law on Bankruptcy and Rehabilitation No. 142/2025/QH15, passed by the National Assembly on December 11, 2025, does something many regional counterparts do not yet attempt: it instructs parties and arbitral tribunals on exactly what happens to an arbitration once a debtor becomes insolvent. Together with the Law on Commercial Arbitration No. 54/2010/QH12, the new law improves upon what used to be an uncertain area of practice, now providing an explicit, mandatory sequence of procedures. Suspension and Termination of Arbitration Proceedings Under article 40(2) of the law, once a Vietnamese court accepts a bankruptcy petition, any arbitration that concerns the debtor’s financial obligations must be temporarily suspended as soon as the tribunal receives the court’s notification. If the court subsequently issues a decision commencing bankruptcy proceedings, article 59(2) takes a further step: the suspended arbitration is terminated outright, and the underlying case file is transferred to the court handling the insolvency for resolution. The two provisions work as a sequence: first suspension, then termination and transfer, rather than as independent triggers. Meanwhile, article 60(4) reinforces this effect by vesting the bankruptcy court with exclusive jurisdiction over all claims against the debtor from the date the petition is accepted. Notably, this mechanism operates automatically, without the need for the insolvency court to issue a separate anti-arbitration order. The tribunal simply suspends or terminates the proceeding by operation of law once notified; however, Vietnamese law currently provides no procedure by which a party can apply to the insolvency court for permission to continue the arbitration despite the statutory effect. Practitioners with a Vietnamese counterparty in arbitration should treat notification of a bankruptcy filing as something to flag to the tribunal immediately since continuing to arbitrate a claim that has become subject to article 40(2) or 59(2) risks producing an award vulnerable
Read More
August 20, 2026
Thai law contains no provision that speaks directly to what happens to an arbitration when one of the parties becomes insolvent. The interaction between arbitration and insolvency is derived instead from the general operation of two separately drafted laws: the Bankruptcy Act B.E. 2483 (1940) and the Arbitration Act B.E. 2545 (2002). Because Thai courts have had few opportunities to interpret how these two statutes apply together, the practical answer to many questions, such as who represents an insolvent party in arbitration, whether an award will be enforced, and what happens to a foreign proceeding, depends on inference from general principles of insolvency, arbitration, and procedural law rather than on settled rules. Liquidation and Restructuring The Bankruptcy Act governs both liquidation, which winds up a debtor’s affairs, and restructuring (rehabilitation), which aims to preserve a business. The consequences for arbitration differ accordingly. In liquidation, the debtor’s assets vest in the official receiver, who alone can conduct or continue any arbitration affecting the estate; the debtor loses the authority to act on its own behalf. In restructuring, the plan preparer or administrator takes over that role, but there is more room for the debtor to remain involved, since the objective of rehabilitation is to keep the business operational. Restructuring carries an automatic stay that takes effect once the Bankruptcy Court accepts the restructuring petition. This stay can halt an arbitration regardless of where it is seated. In contrast, liquidation does not work through a stay; instead, the debtor’s loss of authority over its own assets and disputes is what constrains the arbitration. Neither proceeding provides a party a formal route to apply for permission to continue arbitrating—the Bankruptcy Act contains no such mechanism—though in restructuring cases the Bankruptcy Court may allow proceedings to continue where doing so will not prejudice
Read More
August 20, 2026
As part of its membership in Lex Mundi, Tilleke & Gibbins has released the latest edition of its Guide to Doing Business in Thailand, providing an overview of the legal, regulatory, and commercial considerations for companies establishing or expanding operations in Thailand. The 2026 edition offers practical insight into the country’s business environment, investment framework, and operational requirements. The guide covers a wide range of topics relevant to foreign and domestic investors, including: Investment incentives and promotion schemes Financial facilities and banking regulations Exchange controls and money transfers Import and export regulations Business structures and incorporation options Requirements for establishing a business Operational and compliance considerations Business cessation and insolvency procedures Employment and labor laws Taxation Immigration and visa requirements Prepared by Tilleke & Gibbins lawyers across multiple practice areas, the publication outlines key aspects of doing business in Thailand, including foreign investment restrictions, regulatory compliance obligations, corporate structures, employment requirements, and recent legal and economic developments affecting investors. The publication forms part of Lex Mundi’s Country Guides series, a global collection of jurisdiction-specific reference materials prepared by member firms around the world. Together, these guides help companies evaluate opportunities, compare regulatory environments, and plan international business activities across multiple markets. The full Guide to Doing Business in Thailand 2026 is available through the button below.
Read More
August 18, 2026
The Bank of Thailand (BOT) is seeking public comment on proposed amendments that would significantly expand know-your-customer (KYC) and customer due diligence (CDD) requirements for cash-related transactions at financial institutions (FIs) and specialized financial institutions (SFIs). Released on August 5, 2026, the proposed regulation would supersede BOT Notification No. 16/2569, which focused primarily on cash withdrawal transactions. The public comment period is open through September 3, 2026. The amendments reflect concerns that FIs and SFIs may be used to facilitate the movement, concealment, and conversion of criminal proceeds, potentially damaging institutional operations and public confidence in the financial system. Expanded Scope of Covered Transactions The most significant change is the broadening of the definition of “cash-related transactions.” Previously, the regulation covered only cash withdrawals and uncrossed check withdrawals. The amended regulation extends coverage to include: Cash deposits, check deposits, or receipt of funds from the public not in the form of deposit accounts; Thai baht (THB) banknote exchange (different denominations); Receipt of cash for issuing checks and drafts; and Purchase, sale, or exchange of foreign banknotes. Mandatory Identity Verification and Risk Management For all cash-related transactions, FIs and SFIs must require customers, or authorized or delegated persons, to present identification or verify their identity before every transaction, including one-time (walk-in) transactions. Specific identification requirements vary by transaction type, customer nationality, and channel (branch vs. electronic). FIs and SFIs must also establish comprehensive risk management processes and procedures for cash-related transactions. These requirements include identifying customers or authorized representatives in accordance with transaction-specific verification standards, analyzing customer behavior, implementing risk-management measures proportionate to the customer’s risk profile, and recording abnormal behavior in relevant systems. The BOT also encourages institutions to proactively guide customers toward transaction channels that offer greater traceability than cash. For corporate customers in high-risk business sectors—including foreign
Read More