Costly and time-consuming litigation can cause entrepreneurs to lose a lot of money, leading to cash flow problems and even threatening their ability to continue their business operations. One alternative to these financial challenges is litigation funding. This can be an option for people intending to file a lawsuit or those being sued to address potential financial liquidity problems caused by the financial demands of litigation. Litigation funding refers to financial support provided by an unrelated third party with no interest in the dispute who agrees to fund the costs a party incurs during the dispute resolution process in exchange for a portion of any money potentially awarded to the party being funded. If the funded party loses the case, the third party (i.e., the funder) is solely responsible for the costs. Although litigation funding is available in various countries, Thailand considers it to be contrary to public order and good morals, which renders litigation funding agreements void and unenforceable. Recognition and Enforcement in Thailand There are no laws or regulations in Thailand that specifically mention litigation funding. However, the Supreme Court has consistently ruled that litigation funding is not recognized and is not legally enforceable under Thai law. These Supreme Court precedents have established that agreements to receive benefits in return for pursuing litigation in which the funding party is not involved would be an act of seeking benefit from the litigation of others. As noted above, this purpose has been viewed as contrary to public order and good morals, which results in the agreement being void and unenforceable by other Thai courts (Supreme Court Judgment No. 7014/1999). Therefore, if a litigation funding agreement were in place in a Thai dispute and the funded party won, the funding party would most likely not be legally entitled to any

On March 18, 2024, the president of the Supreme Court of Thailand announced the establishment of a specialized Technology Crime Division within the Criminal Court of Thailand. This represents a significant commitment to cybercrime within the Thai judiciary and a step forward in Thailand’s ability to investigate cybercrime. The rise in cybercrime investigations in recent years has made it increasingly difficult for Thailand’s traditional criminal courts to consider and issue enforcement orders in support of ongoing investigations in a timely manner. The new Technology Crime Division addresses this challenge. This new division has jurisdiction over cybercrime and technology-related crime, fraud or extortion using computers, and criminal offenses relating to personal data protection laws. In addition, this new division has jurisdiction over all requests from competent law enforcement officers seeking court orders under the Computer Crimes Act B.E. 2550, the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562, and the Cybersecurity Act B.E. 2562. The Technology Crime Division will have trainees and judges with expertise in technology and cybercrime—not only to facilitate expert prosecution of cybercrime but also to offer critical and time-sensitive support to law enforcement investigations of alleged cybercrime. The Technology Crime Division is not yet operational. The president of the Supreme Court is expected to announce the division’s opening date in the coming months. For more details on Thailand’s measures for dealing with cybercrime, please contact Michael Ramirez at [email protected] or Piyawat Vitooraporn at [email protected].

Recently, Vietnam has witnessed a dramatic increase in cyber fraud, causing significant financial losses and posing a grave threat to both Vietnamese and foreign entities. With the increasing reliance on digital technology and the widespread adoption of online platforms, the country has become fertile ground for cybercriminals to exploit vulnerabilities and conduct various fraudulent activities. This article aims to present an overview of addressing cyber fraud in Vietnam and offers practical advice for businesses to safeguard themselves from becoming victims of such illicit activities.

Cambodia’s Ministry of Labor and Vocational Training issued the Notification on the Compensation for Terminating an Employment Contract on March 21, 2024, clarifying the compensation due to employees upon the termination of their employment contracts. The notification outlines different requirements depending on the nature of the termination and the type of employment contract, as laid out below. Termination without Valid Reason and in Absence of Serious Misconduct If an employment contract has been terminated by an employer without a valid reason and the employee did not commit any serious misconduct as defined under the relevant article of the Labor Law, the employer must compensate the employee as follows: Fixed-Duration Contract: Wages that have not yet been paid; Unused and unpaid annual leave through the termination date; Severance payment equal to at least 5% of the wages paid to the employee during the length of the contract; and Damages for being laid off before the expiration date of the fixed-duration contract, at least equal to the wages the employee would have received had he or she completed the original contracted term of employment. Unspecified-Duration Contract: Wages that have not yet been paid; Unused and unpaid annual leave through the termination date; Compensation in lieu of notice if the employer did not give prior notice in accordance with the Labor Law; Seniority indemnity for the semester that the employee is terminated and total seniority back payments that have not been paid; and Damages for being laid off, in an amount equal to the seniority payment received during the employment contract. Termination in Cases of Serious Misconduct Employees who commit any serious misconduct as defined under the Labor Law (regardless of whether they are under a fixed-duration or unspecified-duration contract) are entitled only to the following compensation: Wages that have not yet