With Myanmar’s new Trademark Law set to come into force on April 1, enabling legislation has now been issued to grant certain courts jurisdiction to hear claims under the law. This provides trademark owners with an avenue to file claims under the Trademark Law for the first time, and is a very positive indication that no further delays to implementation are likely. The Trademark Law grants the Supreme Court of Myanmar the power to establish an Intellectual Property Rights Court. The Supreme Court can also assign new jurisdiction to existing courts pending the establishment of the Intellectual Property Rights Court. The enabling legislation, which takes the form of five notifications issued by the Supreme Court, accordingly confers jurisdiction on several existing courts. This includes the jurisdiction to hear criminal and civil complaints and appeals against decisions of the trademark authorities. The High Court of Yangon Region and the High Court of the Regions and States are also given appellate jurisdiction to hear appeals against the orders, decisions and judgments of other appointed courts. No further information has been given on whether or when a separate Intellectual Property Rights Court will be established. This development confirms that brand owners—who previously had no recourse to specialized courts in Myanmar regarding the enforcement of their trademark rights—will soon be able to pursue cases. Moreover, the issuance of these notifications gave a strong confirmation that the Trademark Law would indeed take effect on April 1, as planned. As we explained in a previous update, a date for the “grand opening” has yet to be announced, meaning it will still be some time before marks that were refiled during the “soft opening” will be given a filing date and before applications for all other marks can be filed. However, it is expected that the Trademark Rules, which will set

Digital asset litigation is one of the most cutting-edge types of litigation in Thailand. There are factual, technical, regulatory, and legal challenges and hurdles for the parties to the dispute throughout all procedural stages. This is mainly because digital assets are different in nature from more conventional types of assets, as they are digitally created and used on a blockchain network. Legal Status The first issue to be aware of in approaching digital asset litigation is the legal status of digital assets. Under Thai law, there are two key terms concerning digital assets’ legal status: “thing” and “property.” Things are tangible objects, while property provides a much wider range of meaning. Property could be anything—including intangible objects that may be of value and able to be appropriated. It is fairly clear that digital assets are not a “thing” since they are not tangible. However, determining whether digital assets are “property” is even more complicated. Although digital assets are intangible objects, one might argue that, unlike fiat money, they do not have any inherent value but are rather conferred value based on certain people’s perspective. (For example, the Bank of Thailand expressed this opinion of bitcoin in 2014.) Some may even argue that digital assets cannot be possessed and therefore cannot be appropriated. According to these arguments, digital assets should not be regarded as a property either. Legal Grounds Determining whether digital assets are things, property, or something else altogether is crucial to any subsequent litigation. In Thailand, the party initiating the lawsuit (the plaintiff) generally has to state the relevant legal grounds for the complaint—that is, the different relevant legal provisions that the court is to apply to the case. These provisions of Thai laws mostly refer only to “things” or to “property,” not both. This often means that each legal grounds has its

Myanmar’s State Administration Council has specified the enforcement date of the country’s 2019 Trademark Law as April 1, 2023—confirming a recent announcement from Myanmar’s Intellectual Property Department (IPD) to certified trademark representatives in the country. The official public announcement came in Notification No. 82/2023, which was dated March 10, 2023, and published in the government-owned daily newspaper the following day. The planned next step is the promulgation of the Trademark Rules to establish substantive procedures on trademark-related matters for trademark applications under the new system. The rules, which are necessary to establish procedures for collecting official fees, are expected to be issued in March 2023. Once the Trademark Rules are established and the Trademark Law comes into force, the second phase of the IPD’s “soft opening” period will commence—expected to occur on April 3, 2023, if there are no further changes. In this second phase, mark owners can pay the official fees for trademark applications filed within the first phase of the soft opening. According to IPD officials, marks recorded under Myanmar’s old system or used in the country can still be filed together with payment during the soft opening’s second phase, either in person by the mark owner or through a certified representative via the online system. Even if such a previously recorded mark is registered after April 1, 2023, the application during the second phase can still reserve the earliest possible filing date under the new first-to-file system. This second phase will continue until the “grand opening” of the IPD commences, unless officials make further announcements to the contrary. IPD officials have confirmed that the earliest possible filing date of the new system will be the date of the IPD’s grand opening. In light of the ongoing and planned developments, the grand opening is expected to occur within 2023. Considerations This news

Vietnam’s Law on Intellectual Property was comprehensively amended in 2022 (“2022 IP Law”), and the amended law came into effect (with the exception of a few provisions) on 1 January 2023. Along with amendments of substantive matters, the revised version also touches upon the requirements for providing IP representation (agent) services, at both the organizational and individual level. Requirements for Organizations Article 154 of the previous IP Law provided the following conditions for organizations to act as IP representation service organizations: The organization is a lawfully established and operating law-practicing enterprise, cooperative or organization, or a scientific and technological service organization, except for foreign law-practicing organizations operating in Vietnam. The organization has the function of providing IP representation services stated in its business registration certificate or operation registration certificate. The head(s) of the organization or a person(s) authorized by the head(s) of the organization has a certificate for practicing IP representation services. While the first requirement remains unchanged, the 2022 IP Law has removed the second requirement, and revised the third requirement to be more relaxed. Specifically, the amended provision only requires that there must be at least one individual holding a certificate for practicing IP representation services in each IP representation service organization. (Regarding the second requirement, while it is no longer stated in the IP Law, this does not mean that any organization can practice IP representation services, because this is a conditional business line and only organizations who meet the conditions for providing such services, provided in other legislation, can do business in this field.) Requirements for Individuals At the individual level, the law both tightens and loosens the requirements. Under the former law, to be granted a certificate for practicing IP representation services, the individual must: Be a Vietnamese citizen with full capacity for civil acts; Reside permanently in Vietnam; Have a university degree; Have either directly

Vietnam’s amended Law on Intellectual Property of 2022 (“Amended IP Law”) took effect on January 1, 2023, with the exception of a few provisions. However, subordinate legal documents (bylaws) providing necessary details and guidance on the new law still have not been issued, leaving some aspects of the law’s implementation in a state of limbo. This has caused a particular challenge for applications for establishing industrial property rights that were filed before January 1, 2023, but remain pending at the Intellectual Property Office of Vietnam (“IP Office”). While waiting for the official bylaws to be promulgated, the IP Office has issued some internal protocols for handling applications in this interim period. Partial Grant of Protection Titles The Amended IP Law mentions, for the first time, the possibility of partial granting of protection titles for industrial property objects. Under the amended Article 118, the IP Office can issue a notice of its intention to grant partial protection to the allowable parts of a patent/design/trademark application. However, as an interim protocol, the intention to partially grant protection has been temporarily put on hold until further guidance is issued. Security Control on Patents For patent applications based on Vietnamese inventions, if there are any corresponding patent applications filed overseas, the IP Office will suspend the examination until the official new bylaws on security control are provided. Applications for Designs which Are Not Visible During Use The IP Office imposes a specific mechanism on design applications filed from August 1, 2020, until January 1, 2023, in which the designs are not visible during the exploitation of the utility of complex products. Accordingly, even if a notice of intention to grant was issued but there was no decision on granting by January 1, 2023, the IP Office will issue a new notice on the intended rejection, indicating that the design will

On March 14, 2023, the Competition Commission of Cambodia (CCC) set out its merger filing thresholds in Decision No. 095 on Thresholds for Prior Notification of Business Mergers. This was a follow-up to the recent issuance of a regulation outlining the requirements and procedures for merger and acquisition filings. Decision No. 095 applies to all business combinations subject to premerger notification requirements under this prior regulation. The thresholds for when the CCC must be notified of a merger are laid out in the table below. In current practice, the term “turnover” typically refers to a company’s total sales revenue, while “input purchase turnover” denotes the value of materials or equipment acquired for production purposes. Although this reflects the initial interpretation of these terms, it is advisable to seek confirmation or clarification from the CCC before the filing to ensure accuracy and alignment with their current definitions, as it is conceivable that the interpretation may change. Decision No. 095 leaves room for the Ministry of Commerce to amend these thresholds as deemed necessary. Outlook In the last two years, Cambodia has steadily issued regulations to strengthen its legal framework for competition. Although gaps remain, especially with regard to enforcement of fines and certain unclear terms, more regulations are likely in 2025 and 2026.

Attorneys in Tilleke & Gibbins’ Jakarta office have contributed a new “Life Sciences Regulation in Indonesia” chapter to Practical Law’s updated Life Sciences Global Guide. The chapter covers a range of regulatory issues related to the development, manufacturing, and selling of pharmaceutical products and medical devices, including the following topics: Pharmaceuticals: Laws and regulatory authorities Clinical trials: Legal, regulatory, and procedural requirements Manufacturing and distribution Marketing: Authorization for marketing medicinal products, monitoring compliance and penalties, pharmacovigilance and other commitments, foreign marketing authorizations Data privacy Packaging, labeling, and tracking Biological medicines Medical devices: Legislation and regulatory authorities, definition and classification Healthcare IT Combination products and borderlines Natural health products Developments, reforms, and proposals Practical Law, produced by Thomson Reuters, is the world’s leading legal know-how resource for business lawyers, publishing a huge range of guides covering hundreds of jurisdictions and practice areas. The full “Life Sciences Regulation in Indonesia” chapter can be accessed on the Practical Law website

Tilleke & Gibbins’ life sciences specialists in Indonesia have contributed a new “Life Sciences Commercialization in Indonesia” chapter to the Life Sciences Global Guide from Practical Law. This Q&A guide to commercializing life sciences innovations in Indonesia provides important information that companies can use to shape their strategies for life sciences products and activities in the jurisdiction. Specifically, the chapter covers: Overview of the life sciences sector Pricing, government funding, and reimbursement: National health care system, price regulation and reimbursement Distribution and sale Cross-border trade and parallel imports Advertising and engagement with patient organizations Patents: Conditions for patentability, registration, length of protection, infringement, international treaties Trademarks: Requirements, registration Competition law issues: Authorities and legislation, commercial contracts and competition law, licensing approvals and formalities Product liability: Regulators, medicinal product liability law, liable partners, defenses, product liability claims, remedies Practical Law, produced by Thomson Reuters, is the world’s leading legal know-how resource for business lawyers, publishing a huge range of guides covering hundreds of jurisdictions and practice areas. The full “Life Sciences Commercialization in Indonesia” section can be found on the Practical Law website.