ベトナムは、知的財産（IP: Intellectual Property）訴訟弁護士にとって重要な意味を持つ大規模な司法改革に移行しつつある。2025年半ばに可決されると予想される法律草案は、裁判所制度を現在の二審制を維持しながら、三審制に再構築します。本改革には、専門の知的財産裁判所の設立と、知的財産紛争解決に関する方法及び場所を根本的に変える可能性のある管轄権の再配分が含まれています。 63から34へ：省の減少・裁判所の減少、広がる影響力 新しいモデルでは、司法は (i) ハノイ、ダナン、ホーチミン・シティに新設される3つの控訴裁判所を有する最高人民裁判所、(ii) （行政統合により63省から34省に減少に伴う）34の省級人民裁判所、および(iii) 既存の県級裁判所に代わる新設の地方(regional-level)レベルの裁判所（tòa án khu vực）の三審制に編成されます。各地方裁判所は、省内の複数の県等の裁判所を包含しています。各省の県等の裁判所の数は、計画された減少後の司法地域の数に基づいて決定されます。 省級裁判所の数は減少しますが、新設される地方裁判所は管轄権が拡大されます。特に、これらの裁判所は広範な民事、商事、行政事件の第一審の管轄権を有します。刑事事件に関して、これらの裁判所は、20年以下の懲役刑に処される犯罪を扱い、より重大な犯罪は省級裁判所の管轄下に残ります。 知的財産訴訟弁護士にとって、これは、第一審事件、特に民事侵害紛争が、省級裁判所から地方裁判所に移行することを意味します。これらの地方裁判所が知的財産のエンフォースメントの新たな戦場となります。 同じ二審制、異なるゲームボード 司法構造は進化していますが、基本的な裁判所の枠組みは変わりません。ベトナムは第一審と控訴審の二審制を維持します。新しい点は、控訴がどこで行われるかという点です。 既存の3つの上級人民裁判所は解散される予定であり、それ代わりに、最高人民裁判所の直接管理下に3つの控訴部門が設立されます。これらの新しい控訴部門は、地方全体第二審の審理を担当します。 解散に備えて、上級人民裁判所は未解決の控訴事件（特に知的財産関連事件が多く含まれています）の解決に取り組んでいます。未解決の事件は新しい控訴部門に移管され、司法の継続性、再割当の計画、事件固有の専門知識の保持に関する重要な問題が生じることになります。 専門の知的財産裁判所の設立 最も期待されている改革の一つは、専門の知的財産裁判所の設立計画です。まだ草案段階ですが、本提案は、ハノイやホーチミン・シティなどの主要経済拠点にある特定の地方裁判所が破産および知的財産事件を第一審で扱うことを想定しています。 このモデルが実施されれば、知的財産訴訟は技術的に装備され、戦略的に配置された少数の裁判所に集中することになります。控訴は関連する省級裁判所で審理され、二審制が維持されます。この変更により、小規模な省で知的財産訴訟を提起することはできなくなります。代わりに、ハノイやホーチミン・シティなどの主要都市にある専門の知的財産裁判所に提起することが必要になります。これらの都市の裁判官は知的財産事件の取り扱いに経験があるため、知的財産紛争は以前よりも効率的かつ短期間で解決されると期待されています。 本モデルは、韓国の知的財産審判院(Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board)や日本の知的財産高等裁判所(Intellectual Property High Court)などの制度にベトナムを近づけます。グローバルな権利保有者や国内のイノベーターにとって、これは一貫性、専門知識、司法の予測可能性に向けた重要な一歩となるであろう。 デジタル司法の実現 構造改革と並行して、ベトナムの司法はよりデジタルファーストのアプローチの基盤を築いています。電子的訴訟手続のサービス、裁判費用のオンライン支払い、バーチャル審理、そして、その他のテクノロジーを活用したイノベーションを取り入れるために関連する手続法の改正が進行中です。 これらの変更は、特に国境を越えた紛争をナビゲートしたり、複雑な証拠提出を管理する知的財産訴訟当事者にとって、変革的なものとなる可能性があります。手続の効率が向上すれば、ボトルネックが減少し、迅速な司法アクセスが促進されるであろう。 移行期の混乱：予想されること 大規模な改革にはつきものですが、移行期間中には複雑な問題が発生する可能性があります。すでに裁判所のスケジュールに遅れが生じており、特に商事事件および知的財産関連事件において、新しい管轄権の変更が正式に決定されるまで新しい訴訟を受け入れたり処理したりすることをためらう裁判官もいます。 2025年6月に予想通り可決されれば、新しい司法制度は年末までに運用開始されます。知的財産実務家には、保留中の事件を再評価し、フォーラムの変更を予測し、手続の再調整に備えるための短い期間が与えられます。 要するに、本改革は単なる裁判所の再編成ではなく、ベトナムの法的ランドスケープの基礎的再構築になります。さらに、知的財産弁護士にとって、早期に適応することが最良の訴訟戦略となります。   備考：本和文は英文記事を翻訳したものです。原文については、以下のリンクをご参照ください。 Vietnam’s Court Reform: What IP Litigators Need to Know

On May 2, 2025, the Trade Competition Commission of Thailand (TCCT), in cooperation with the OECD, held a conference to discuss the results of the OECD Peer Review of Thailand’s competition law and policy. This review, conducted under the second phase of the OECD-Thailand Country Program, marks a significant milestone in Thailand’s ongoing institutional reform. Tilleke & Gibbins’ trade competition experts were invited to participate in both the program and the conference. The OECD Peer Review aimed to assess the current state of Thailand’s legal and regulatory environment surrounding competition law and policies, pinpoint strengths and weaknesses, and offer recommendations on potential future development. This article highlights the review’s key findings and recommendations, and their implications for businesses operating in Thailand. Institutional Framework: Room for Improvement Competition law in Thailand has undergone significant transformation, particularly since the enactment of the Trade Competition Act B.E. 2560 (2017) (TCA). This landmark legislation aimed to revolutionize the competition regime, notably by amending important legal provisions to enhance public enforcement capabilities and establishing the TCCT as an independent authority separate from government ministries, endowed with its own budget and powers to enforce competition law across key areas: anticompetitive agreements, abuse of dominant market positions, merger control, and unfair trade practices. The goal was to create a more efficient, flexible, and independent agency and to prevent political intervention. However, the OECD Peer Review points out a major impediment. The TCCT faces considerable budget and human resource constraints, which may impact its enforcement capacity. Its budget is comparatively low by international and regional standards, and only a fraction of its staff is dedicated to core competition enforcement (merger control and anticompetitive behavior). Furthermore, there is room for the TCCT to continue its improvements in expertise and efficiency—areas the TCCT has been attempting to shore up in recent years. Scope of

On April 29, 2025, the government of Vietnam promulgated Decree No. 94/2025/ND-CP with regulations on a controlled “sandbox” for innovative fintech solutions in the banking sector (Decree 94). The decree aims to promote innovation, modernize banking, and enhance financial inclusion while assessing risks and benefits of fintech solutions in a controlled testing environment. Fintech Sandbox Currently, the fintech sandbox focuses on three specific areas: Credit scoring Open API data sharing Peer-to-peer (P2P) lending Eligible participants for the fintech sandbox include: Credit institutions and foreign bank branches (except for P2P lending) Fintech companies operating in Vietnam Cross-border supply by foreign providers is not included in the sandbox framework. Eligible participants are permitted to provide fintech solutions only within the scope specified in the Certificate of Sandbox Participation issued by the State Bank of Vietnam in consultation with other ministries. P2P lending companies face specific restrictions within the fintech sandbox, including prohibitions against: Providing security for customer loans Operating as a customer (i.e., P2P lender or borrower) Providing P2P lending solutions to pawn shops The maximum sandbox period is two years, with the possibility of extension as permitted by law. The outcomes of the fintech sandbox will serve as a practical basis for authorities to develop and refine future fintech regulations. It is worth noting that participation in the sandbox does not guarantee that participants will meet relevant business and investment conditions that may be stipulated in future regulations. Decree 94 will take effect on July 1, 2025, signaling that the Vietnamese government intends to take a proactive approach to fostering fintech development. Implications Parties interested in participating in the fintech sandbox should begin preparing now to be ready to apply for a Certificate of Sandbox Participation when the decree takes effect.

Attorneys from Tilleke & Gibbins have updated the latest edition of Doing Business in Thailand, a Q&A-style guide from Thomson Reuters Practical Law that offers an overview of key legal considerations for companies operating in jurisdictions worldwide. The contribution outlines the country’s legal and regulatory framework for foreign investment and business operations and reflects the latest legislative developments. The chapter addresses the following core topics: Legal system: Structure of the courts and the codified nature of Thai law. Foreign investment: Business restrictions under the Foreign Business Act, sector-specific regulations, exchange control rules, and investment incentives. Business vehicles: Overview of partnerships, private and public limited companies, and other legal entities. Employment: Labor protections, employment contracts, foreign worker requirements, and termination procedures. Tax: Corporate and personal income tax, indirect taxes, and tax obligations for residents and non-residents. Intellectual property: Registration and enforcement of patents, trademarks, designs, and copyrights. Data protection: Key provisions of the Personal Data Protection Act and related compliance obligations. Competition law: Regulatory framework under the Trade Competition Act. Anti-bribery and corruption: Relevant legislation and enforcement mechanisms. E-commerce and digital business: Legal regime for online transactions and digital platforms. Marketing and advertising: Consumer protection laws and regulations affecting advertising and marketing practices. Product regulation and liability: Safety standards, liability regimes, and roles of enforcement authorities. Practical Law, a legal reference resource from Thomson Reuters, publishes a range of guides for hundreds of jurisdictions and practice areas. The insurance and reinsurance guide is a valuable resource for legal practitioners, covering numerous jurisdictions worldwide. To view the latest version of the guide, please visit the Practical Law website and enroll in the free Practical Law trial to gain full access.

With a favorable crypto climate from the Trump administration in the United States, Thailand is ready for digital asset platforms and has market appetite. This article highlights the country’s regulatory initiatives supporting the growth of digital assets like crypto, stablecoins, and smart contracts, along with efforts to establish clear oversight. Bank of Thailand Sandbox Stablecoins used as a medium of payment, particularly those pegged to the Thai baht (THB) for public use, are considered as mirroring fiat currency, which violates the Currency Act B.E. 2501 (1958). These can also be classified as e-money under the Payment Systems Act B.E. 2560 (2017). The Bank of Thailand (BOT) urges issuers to engage in preconsultation prior to implementation, due to concerns about stablecoins being used in place of THB currency. Other FX- or asset-backed stablecoins are not recognized as legal tender under Thai law, and users must bear their own risks. The BOT recognizes the potential and benefits of these technologies in reducing operational costs for financial service providers and addressing the needs of financial service users. Consequently, the BOT issued a sandbox framework in June 2024. In particular, the enhanced regulatory sandbox allows nonlicensed entities to test financial innovations in controlled conditions. These tests must have a clearly defined duration (usually under one year) and involve a limited user group with an exit strategy. Several programmable payment projects—automated transactions with predefined conditions for the payment of goods and services—were piloted under this sandbox, which closed for applications in September 2024. Eight participants are planning to launch their test runs this year, some of which include asset tokenization or exchange global stablecoins in their programmable payment projects. Thai Securities and Exchange Commission Sandbox Given that digital asset businesses fall under the Royal Decree on Digital Asset Businesses B.E. 2561 (2018), supervised by Thailand’s Securities and Exchange Commission

The Bank of Thailand (BOT) is accepting public comments until May 2, 2025, on three draft notifications that will institute an enhanced supervision scheme and impose additional requirements for systemically important retail payment system (SIRPS) operators to align with international standards and encourage open infrastructure and competition. The SIRPS operators will be determined by the BOT from the “designated payment system operators” under the Payment Systems Act B.E. 2560 (2017). SIRPS Designation The BOT will announce a list of payment system operators designated as SIRPS operators and thus subject to enhanced supervision. The BOT will evaluate whether the payment system operator should be deemed a SIRPS operator when it meets the criteria in either the BOT’s quantitative or qualitative assessments, which cover the following: Quantitative assessment: The payment system’s transaction values, market share, cross-border payment network scale and value, and settlement with other financial market infrastructure. Qualitative assessment: The payment system’s function as a part of the country’s payment system infrastructure, the significance of the system users’ roles in the payment services, the substitutability of the payment system, and the impact level on the public and users in the event of an emergency or system suspension. Supervision of SIRPS Business Operations SIRPS operators will be subject to heightened supervision in three areas, in addition to various BOT regulations on designated payment system supervision, as follows: Governance: SIRPS operators will be required to have a balanced board composition with an independent director and directors with varied expertise, establish subcommittees to assist the board in supervising the operator’s compliance with its policy and strategy, and have senior executives overseeing risk and technology security separately from the executives overseeing business operations. Risk management and security: SIRPS operators will be required to have comprehensive risk management to ensure system stability and security. This includes having a clear service agreement and tools

虽然泰国《外商经营企业法》（B.E. 2542（1999年））（简称“FBA”）已施行逾二十年，但名义股东安排的问题仍然是一个备受关注的话题，尤其是在泰国当局持续打击利用泰国国民作为名义股东，以规避FBA项下外资持股限制的企业行为的背景下。 FBA 的制定旨在限制外国方（包括外国个人、海外注册的法人实体，以及由外国人控股的泰国公司）在未经许可的情况下在泰国从事特定商业活动的能力。由于该法律限制，不少企业经营者选择通过名义股东的方式来运营其在泰国的业务。 与许多其他国家类似，名义股东安排在泰国是非法的。FBA 明确禁止外国人通过泰国国民代为持股，从而实质性拥有并经营法律所保留的业务。参与此类安排（包括在未取得FBA规定的必要许可的情况下经营业务）可能会面临严厉处罚，包括监禁、罚款，甚至强制解散公司。泰国当局，特别是商务部和特别调查局（DSI），持续积极调查涉及名义股东安排的可疑案件。 FBA 将外商经营的业务活动分为三类清单，每一类均设有不同程度的外资参与和持股限制： 第一类清单（List 1）：外国人严禁从事第一类清单中列明的任何业务活动，例如媒体（包括报纸、广播和电视）、稻米种植、林业、泰国传统药草采集，以及土地交易等。 第二类清单（List 2）：外国人如欲经营第二类清单所列业务，须向商业发展厅（Department of Business Development, DBD）申请《外商经营许可证》（Foreign Business License, FBL），并获得泰国内阁批准。此外，公司泰国股东的持股比例不得低于40%（经商务部长及内阁特别批准者可降至25%），董事会成员中至少须有五分之二为泰国国籍人士。此类清单涵盖涉及国家安全的业务（如武器贸易和国内航空），对泰国艺术、文化、传统和手工艺造成影响的业务，以及可能影响自然资源或环境的业务。 第三类清单（List 3）：外国人如欲从事第三类清单所列业务，亦需向 DBD 申请 FBL，但审批程序相较第二类清单更为宽松，由外商经营委员会（Foreign Business Committee）负责审批。第三类清单涉及目前泰国人尚未具备充分竞争能力的业务，包括广泛的服务类业务。此外，该清单还包括“其他服务业务”，该项为兜底条款，实质上将各类服务性业务纳入受限范畴。 对于希望在泰国开展业务的外国企业而言，申请《外商经营许可证》（FBL）并非唯一合法且可持续的选项。外商还可通过特定法律途径取得经营资格，例如依据《泰美友好与经济关系条约》（Treaty of Amity and Economic Relations between the United States and Thailand）获得保护，或根据《投资促进法》、《泰国工业园管理局法》及其他相关法律申请许可。尽管这些途径在程序上可能较为复杂，但它们为外资企业提供了安全、合法的经营基础，有助于实现长期稳定的业务发展。 鉴于近期泰国当局对名义股东安排的监管力度日益加强，外商在泰投资设立企业时，应更加审慎地选择其商业架构，确保取得适当的许可，并严格遵守外资持股限制的相关法律规定。通过合法合规地运用现有法律框架中的各类途径，外资企业可为其在泰国的新设业务奠定坚实基础，助力业务的稳健发展与长远成功。

To foster foreign investment and attract leading international universities to establish campuses in Vietnam, the government has recently adopted several regulations, including Decree No. 124/2025 on foreign cooperation and investment in the field of education, Decree No. 125/2024 on regulatory requirements for educational investment and operation, and Decision No. 452/QD-TTg approving the Planning of the Network of University and Teaching Institutions for the Period 2021–2030, with a Vision to 2050 (the “University Network Plan”). However, foreign investors and private higher educational institutions must still navigate regulatory complexities, build strong academic reputations, and ensure financial sustainability to compete effectively in an increasingly competitive landscape. Below are highlights of recent developments in university-related regulations that may open new opportunities for foreign investment in Vietnam. Adopting the University Network Plan The University Network Plan encourages the development of private higher education institutions (“HEIs”), especially not-for-profit ones, and welcomes top foreign HEIs to open their own foreign branch campuses (“FBCs”) in Vietnam, with the following targets. Until 2030: Encouraging new establishment and expansion of the network of private HEIs (including their branch campuses) and FBCs of top foreign HEIs, especially those offering training majors of science, engineering, and technology. Developing regional HEI networks along economic corridors centered on large cities—not only the traditional economic hubs of Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City, but also other provinces and cities throughout the country such as Hai Phong, Nghe An (Vinh), Thanh Hoa, Hue, Da Nang, Khanh Hoa (Nha Trang), Binh Đinh (Quy Nhon), Dak Lak (Buon Ma Thuot), Lam Dong (Da Lat), Binh Duong, and Can Tho. Vision to 2050: Increasing the number and proportion of private HEIs, especially not-for-profit ones. Having private HEIs account for about 50% of learners. Requirements for Foreign Investment in Higher Education Foreign investors can engage in higher education business in Vietnam via three forms: (i) establishment of