Asia Legal Trends 2024 | Law.asia

A wrap-up of the year’s most significant events affecting legal in the region, and how they impacted in-house counsel, policymakers, regulators and law firms

In terms of technological evolution, 2024 could be described as the year of living dangerously. Artificial intelligence truly entered the psyche of the legal sector, for its perceived dangers as much as its benefits, and along with it came major concerns on data management and protection. Adequate regulation proved a recurring theme this past year as many countries struggled to keep up with the sheer pace of change. Based on insights from senior lawyers across 11 Asian jurisdictions, 2024 has been marked by a clash between toughened legal measures and the soaring demands of innovation.

Lawmakers in Asia have taken targeted regulatory steps to tackle longstanding issues, as well as to rein in radical technological transformation. Our research shows that not only have regulators across the region made unprecedented moves, but companies and law firms have also departed from their traditional or decades-long strategies.

From Indonesia’s shocking ban on Apple’s iPhone 16 sale on local content non-compliance grounds, to China’s exodus of US law firms, and Nippon Steel’s ground-breaking USD14.1 billion steel buyout, this year has not been short of surprises challenging conventional wisdom.

With expert views from senior lawyers around the region, let us walk you through the massive upheavals, the biggest deals and the most significant regulation that have shaped this amazing year of change.

Artificial intelligence

More and more law firms in Asia, particularly in key regional economies such as South Korea, have been adopting AI for various reasons, from enhancing management efficiency to contract reviews to legal searches in the past year.

At the same time, concerns ranging from data security to ethics over the rapid growth of AI have intensified, leading to calls for legislative action to regulate the technology in some Asian countries.

The South Korean government in particular was under mounting pressure to bring the tech under regulatory control.

With a backdrop of political uncertainty following then South Korean president Yoon Suk Yeol’s martial law declaration and his subsequent impeachment, the National Assembly passed the Act on the Development of Artificial Intelligence and Establishment of Trust (AI Basic Act) on 26 December. You Jung Lee, managing partner at One Law Partners in Seoul, points to how AI-related challenges have become “glaringly apparent” with the rise of AI-driven deepfake crimes, exposing “profound vulnerabilities” in existing legal structures in the country.

“These alarming incidents not only brought the AI-related issues into sharp public focus, but also prompted lawmakers to introduce targeted legal amendments aimed at enhancing victim protection and holding digital platform providers more accountable,” says Lee.

There was an urgent need to enact the AI law to enhance, among other things, data processing protocols and protective measures for AI systems in South Korea, senior lawyers in the country tell Asia Business Law Journal.

“Amid the global AI boom, companies are increasingly seeking advice on building AI-based systems and responding to AI regulations,” says Jong-Han Oh, managing partner at Shin & Kim in Seoul.

Concerns over the risks of the widening use of AI without specific legal frameworks for the technology are not limited to South Korea. Hong Kong, which currently does not have AI-specific legislation, has also seen a rapid integration of AI into legal operations among law firms this year.

Calling AI a big trend in 2024 and a “double-edged sword”, Gordon Oldham, senior partner at Oldham Li & Nie in Hong Kong, agrees that the technology can significantly streamline routine tasks, freeing lawyers to focus on complex and high-level legal issues.

“But I cannot sugarcoat it … this technological advancement comes with real challenges including concerns about reliability, data security and ethical considerations, raising tough questions about how AI will co-exist with our profession’s core principles,” says Oldham.

Although Oldham worries about “thorny” issues around data security and the need for human oversight as AI adoption accelerates, he points to how the rise of AI in 2024 catalysed a surge in investment in startups with a focus on AI and data transfer.

“The demand for legal expertise in drafting and negotiating documentation for establishing and facilitating investments in startup companies, including but not limited to investment agreements and other initial set-up documentation, has grown exponentially,” he says.

In Japan, which currently has no overarching legal framework for regulating AI, the Ministry of Justice’s (MOJ) guidelines, published in August 2023, interpreting the relationship between AI legal technology and the Japanese Attorney Act has had a significant impact on the further development of AI tools specialised for legal use in Japan in 2024, says So Saito, founder and Akasaka Office president of So & Sato Law Offices in Tokyo.

Amid increasing collaboration between Japanese law firms and legal technology service providers on AI utilisation for legal content, including M&A templates, the MOJ’s guidelines have clarified what, in the provision of AI contract-related business support services, constitutes unauthorised practice of law under the Japanese Attorney Act.

Saito, a Japan and New York bar-qualified lawyer who specialises in advising on web3, financial technology and venture finance, says that even before the guidelines issued in August last year, law firms had already been using legal technology software to look for disadvantageous and missing clauses when doing typical contract checks. He has heard that clients have also been using legaltech software.

“The fact that the provision of AI tools has been interpreted as not, to a certain extent, constituting a violation of the Japanese Attorney Act is likely to lead to further progress in the provision and use of AI beyond typical contract checks,” says Saito.

The rapid integration of AI in Asia’s legal systems highlights challenges in governance, ethics and regulation. While AI streamlines operations and boosts investment, it also raises concerns about security, reliability and oversight. This duality mirrors broader changes in Asia, where innovation meets growing regulatory demands. Similarly, the global focus on environment and social governance (ESG) is transforming corporate and legal landscapes, driving accountability, sustainable growth and policy reforms.

ESG

As global urgency around ESG issues grows, Asia finds itself at the forefront of this transformative shift. In 2024, key developments across the region not only emphasised the importance of ESG principles but also set the stage for an era of heightened accountability, innovation and legal evolution. Legal experts agree that this year marked a turning point, with significant strides in policy, finance and corporate governance.

As Akshay Chudasama, co-managing partner at Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co in Mumbai, points out, climate finance has become a critical driver for ESG adoption in Asia, and the region has witnessed a surge in green bond issuances.

“Climate finance in Asia is growing, driven by the need for climate action and sustainable development. The Asia-Pacific region is also witnessing an increased focus on sustainable finance and ESG considerations,” says Chudasama.

He points to key trends including increased green bond issuances, a focus on climate resilience, and fintech’s emerging role in promoting access to climate finance for SMEs and low-income households, with the Asia Development Bank playing a supportive role in the region.

Chudasama says 2024 was a pivotal year for climate jurisprudence in Asia, marked by landmark rulings and a global focus on the region’s environmental challenges. In MK Ranjitsinh v Union of India, India’s Supreme Court elevated the “right to be free from the adverse effects of climate change” as fundamental under articles 14 and 21 of the Indian Constitution.

“The 2024 United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP 29), laid a lot of emphasis on Asia, in terms of emphasising the need for a rapid energy transition, climate adaptation and resilience, enhanced early warning systems, climate-resilient infrastructure, and climate-smart agriculture,” he says.

Kunal Thakore, joint managing partner at TT&A in Mumbai, echoes this stance, noting: “We have also noticed a shift in the government’s focus towards sustainable development and technological integration.”

Countries across Asia have taken distinctive approaches to embedding ESG principles into their regulatory frameworks. In the Philippines, regulatory initiatives like mandatory sustainability reporting and climate change expenditure tagging reflect the government’s proactive stance.

Maria Christina Macasaet-Acaban, partner and head of the corporate, commercial and M&A practice group at Quisumbing Torres in Manila, highlights how these measures are shaping corporate behaviour and attracting foreign investment aligned with the country’s sustainable development goals.

“Philippine companies are actively adapting to ESG and sustainability requirements through various initiatives. These efforts also impact foreign investment and support the country’s sustainable development goals,” says Macasaet-Acaban.

In Malaysia, ESG has taken centre stage, with the Securities Commission introducing robust guidelines for ESG disclosures. Brian Law, managing partner at LAW Partnership in Kuala Lumpur, notes that these requirements are pushing businesses to integrate transparency and accountability into their core operations.

“With increased global awareness of ESG issues, regulators in several Asian countries, including Malaysia, are pushing for greater accountability and transparency,” says Law.

Meanwhile, Indonesia is aligning its regulatory efforts with ambitious net zero targets for 2060. The Indonesian government encouraged and promoted the use of rooftop solar power generation by businesses, governing the installation and operation of private rooftop solar panel systems by customers of public interest electricity supply business licence holders.

Luky Walalangi, managing partner at Walalangi & Partners in Jakarta, says new regulations aim to attract sustainable investment while addressing stakeholder concerns.

“By establishing clear regulatory frameworks, Indonesia seeks to attract both domestic and international investment in sustainable projects, enhancing economic growth while adhering to its environmental obligations,” says Walalangi.

Kudun Sukhumananda, founding partner at Kudun and Partners in Bangkok, highlights how the growing emphasis on ESG compliance has reshaped Thailand’s corporate strategies in 2024. He says businesses are under mounting pressure to overhaul traditional practices, implement comprehensive sustainability frameworks and align with global standards.

“The scrutiny on public listed companies has exposed systemic issues in corporate governance and internal controls, shaking investor confidence and creating significant reputational risks for Thai capital markets,” says Sukhumananda.

The Clean Air Act, for instance, has introduced significant challenges by requiring companies to adopt stricter environmental controls, including reducing emissions and enhancing reporting transparency. These demands necessitate substantial investment and operational adjustments, compounded by heightened investor expectations for credible ESG commitments, and the legal risks associated with non-compliance.

“For law firms, advising clients on navigating untested legislation like the Clean Air Act and managing disputes around environmental liability are particularly demanding,” says Sukhumananda.

With ESG principles redefining corporate strategies and demanding greater transparency, the emphasis on governance has become more prominent. This stress on accountability drives regulatory changes and empowers stakeholders.

Notably, shareholder activism is rising as investors address governance issues, enhance corporate value and align with evolving sustainability expectations. Across Asia, shareholder engagement is gaining momentum, marking a new era where governance reforms are no longer optional but essential for long-term success.

Shareholder activism

As lagging stock prices and subsequent poor returns to shareholders inevitably lead to a much easier opening for shareholder activism, managing partners in Japan and Korea tell Asia Business Law Journal about the surge in shareholder activism in their countries.

We have been involved in a number of activist and defence deals involving unsolicited takeovers, and we expect that the volume of these deals will continue to increase,” says Ryutaro Nakayama, managing partner at Nishimura & Asahi in Tokyo. “Japanese corporations have shown a positive interest in these types of deals as an opportunity to increase corporate value.”

Nakayama says that in Japan, shareholder activism has been on the rise in the form of unsolicited takeover bids after the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry issued guidelines for corporate takeovers in August last year.

The new guidelines were designed to encourage corporations to consider unsolicited takeover bids as potential opportunities to enhance corporate value and to secure shareholders’ interests, rather than turning them away. “Though many Japanese corporations have yet to be involved in such transactions, the increase in these types of deals is remarkable,” says Nakayama.

One prime example is the acquisition of Takisawa Machine Tool by Japanese motor maker Nidec via a tender offer. According to TMI Associates, which advised on the deal, Nidec repeatedly referred to the concepts contained in the guidelines and successfully closed its acquisition. This shows how Japanese companies are now justifying their unsolicited takeovers in a country where “hostile” takeovers have long been taboo.

As a result, the rise in unsolicited takeover bids is encouraging shareholders and equity investors to become more vocal, and is creating a more transparent, competitive and dynamic environment to maximise corporate value.

On the other hand, in South Korea, shareholder activists have been demanding the amendment of the Commercial Act in order to fix a situation where the opinions of minority shareholders are excluded in the decision-making process for critical company matters.

South Korea’s main opposition Democratic Party, led by Lee Jae-myung, has been pushing for passage of the Commercial Act amendment bill in the National Assembly throughout the year.

“Many believe that amendments to the Commercial Act are necessary to enhance corporate value through value-up initiatives by improving South Korea’s outdated governance structure,” says Dong Hoon Lee, managing partner at Barun Law in Seoul.

However, with the impeachment of President Yoon Suk-yeol in the spotlight following the recent declaration of martial law, it is widely believed that any amendment bill will not be passed this year.

Jong-Han Oh, managing partner at Shin & Kim in Seoul, says that activist shareholders have been a driving force in the increase of management disputes in the country. “Shareholder disputes, or shareholder activism, related to corporate governance are becoming more active in the Korean capital markets, leading to a significant increase in management disputes and related advisory services,” says Oh.

A notable example of this was when MBK Partners, a Seoul-based leading private equity firm in Asia, recently partnered with Young Poong, the largest shareholder of Korea Zinc, to call for improvement of the governance structure at Korea Zinc. They claimed that Korea Zinc chairman Yun B Choi’s arbitrary management was alleged to have damaged the shareholder value, with Shin & Kim being the legal adviser for Young Poong.

While shareholder activism advocates for improved transparency, fair representation and accountability within corporations, a similar call for oversight is surfacing in the digital realm. The rise of data-driven technologies has placed data protection and privacy at the head of regulatory concerns across Asia.

Governments are beginning to respond to these challenges with stricter data protection laws aimed at securing sensitive information and maintaining public trust. Just as shareholders push for better corporate governance to protect value, regulators are moving to ensure robust data governance to safeguard the evolving digital economy.

Data protection

As digital transformation accelerates in the Asia-Pacific, data sovereignty and digital governance have become pressing concerns. Managing partners across the region note how the governments in Asia are increasingly focused on enhancing data protection laws, and how this brings both challenges and opportunities for companies and law firms.

“The APAC region is witnessing a surge in data localisation laws, with countries like India, China and Indonesia implementing regulations to safeguard sensitive information,” says Chudasama, at Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co. These laws aim to oversee the processing of the personal data of individuals to ensure that data is not misused or misapplied.

In July, Malaysia’s parliament passed the Personal Data Protection Amendment Bill 2024, introducing major updates to the Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA), which was enacted in 2010. The amendments strengthen penalties for personal data breaches by increasing the fine from MYR300,000 (USD67,000) to MYR1 million, and the maximum imprisonment from two years to three years.

“Malaysia’s PDPA has seen tightening enforcement and penalties,” says Law, at LAW Partnership. “Furthermore, the rise in cybersecurity incidents has led to more stringent regulations on data breaches and protection of sensitive information.”

Melisa Uremovic and Supawat Srirungruang, co-managing partners at Rajah & Tann Thailand in Bangkok, say Thailand’s PDPA saw stricter enforcement this year, with the Office of the Personal Data Protection Committee issuing the first administrative fine for non-compliance with the PDPA in July.

The government is requiring companies to revamp their data governance strategies and address cybersecurity concerns, facing significant legal exposure if they fail to comply.

“The stricter enforcement of data privacy regulations has also increased the complexity of compliance for many companies, particularly those that lack the internal resources or expertise to navigate these requirements,” say Uremovic and Srirungruang.

Regulatory upgrades have been impacting not only companies’ operations in Asian markets, but also compliance costs and market entry strategies. In Vietnam, the government issued the first draft of the Personal Data Protection Decree (PDPD) in September, tentatively set to take effect on 1 January 2026.

The PDPD outlines key compliance obligations for businesses involved in processing personal data in Vietnam; failure to adhere to the regulations outlined in the PDPD will result in repercussions including administrative fines or prosecution.

“The new data legislation, which introduces stricter controls on data handling and cross-border transfers, marks a significant step toward global compliance but presents a learning curve for businesses,” says Tran Duy Canh, managing partner at Dentons LuatViet in Ho Chi Minh City.

In Australia, the parliament passed a world-first bill with a social media ban for children under 16 in November, which could see tech giants fined up to AUD50 million (USD32.5 million) if they fail to prevent under-age users from accessing social media services. A number of experts raised their concerns with the bill, including the potential privacy risks of overcollection of personal information necessary to verify a user’s age.

“Privacy is a key risk raised by the age restriction obligation given the potential for platforms to collect and hold personal, including sensitive, information about vulnerable groups,” says Veronica Scott, a partner at Pinsent Masons in Melbourne.

The lawyers Asia Business Law Journal interviewed say that regulatory developments in the region are not only bringing challenges, but also new opportunities for law firms.

“I believe these events are a minefield of opportunities, rather than challenges,” says Bazul Ashhab, managing partner at Oon & Bazul in Singapore.

“The implementation of stricter data protection frameworks and growing concerns about cybersecurity breaches have heightened demand for expert advice in these areas,” he says.

Jong-Han Oh, managing partner at Shin & Kim in Korea, agrees with Ashhab. “As domestic and international regulations have become increasingly strict and complex, companies are becoming more interested in compliance,” says Oh.

“Personal information/information security, which is becoming increasingly important due to digital and AI transformation, is expected to become a field that attracts attention in terms of compliance.”

As companies across Asia adapt to stricter data governance requirements, deal-making activities remain robust. This momentum is driven by strategies for growth, market expansion and innovation. From acquisitions to transactions, businesses are navigating complex regulatory frameworks while pursuing opportunities that reshape industries across the region.

Deal highlights

Japan has been a frontrunner driving cross-border deal activity in Asia, having started 2024 off with Nippon Steel announcing its USD14.1 billion proposed takeover of US Steel Corporation, and ending the year with Nippon Life Insurance making an USD8.2 billion offer for US life insurer Resolution Life Group Holdings.

Due to a saturated domestic market, Japanese companies have been ramping up overseas investment in the past year, after an outbound M&A slump in the aftermath of the covid pandemic.

According to data published on 18 November 2024 by Hong Kong-based private capital advisory and fund placement platform Finex Hong Kong, Japan’s outbound M&A volume surged by 36% to nearly USD45 billion in 2024. Exemplifying the rise in Japan’s overseas investment, Finex pointed to USD76 billion spent by Japanese companies in launching more than 5,430 projects across Vietnam as of September 2024.

The desire for further corporate growth has led not only to overseas acquisitions worth billions of dollars – such as Japanese homebuilder Sekisui House’s USD4.9 billion buyout of Denver-based industry peer MDC Holdings at the start of 2024 – but also record-breaking deals for different industries. Nippon Life’s recent USD8.2 billion offer to acquire US counterpart Resolution Life made the proposed takeover the largest overseas buyout by a Japanese insurer to date.

While Japanese companies have been making record-breaking investments outside Asia, we have seen benchmark-setting transactions in the Philippines in the past year that were “first of a kind” for the industries in which they took place.

Hailed by senior lawyers in the country as a “game changer”, the creation of one of the Philippines’ largest independent telecommunications tower companies following a combination between Phil-Tower Consortium and Miescor Infrastructure Development Corporation was the first such deal in the country’s independent tower market.

The new entity, which is owned by a consortium of international and local investors including Macquarie, Stonepeak, Manila Electric Company and Global Network, boasts a portfolio of more than 3,300 operational towers across the Philippines.

Mark S Gorriceta, the managing partner and head of the corporate, banking and finance and TMT groups of Gorriceta Africa Cauton & Saavedra in Metro Manila, told Asia Business Law Journal that the Philippine Competition Commission’s approval of the Phil-Tower-MIDC combination highlighted the regulatory endorsement of the sharing of passive or non-electronic telecoms infrastructure such as towers.

As one of Southeast Asia’s fast-growing economies, Vietnam has hosted the establishment of the country’s first LNG-to-power plants this year, introducing 1.6GW to the national grid and helping to reduce Vietnam’s coal dependency in line with the government’s Power Development Plan.

Six firms – Norton Rose Fulbright, VILAF, YKVN, Kim & Chang, Bär & Karrer and Pinsent Masons – advised on the USD521.5 million financing of PetroVietnam Power Corporation’s (PV Power) Nhon Trach 3 and 4 LNG-to-power projects.

Truong Nhat Quang, YKVN’s managing partner and lead on the deal, says these were the first large-scale LNG projects in Vietnam to be financed without a government guarantee, establishing a crucial precedent for future projects.

India, which has been running a robust equity capital market during a general downturn in IPOs across Asia under a high interest rate environment, also recently made international headlines for hosting the largest IPO in India, in late October.

Hyundai Motor India’s landmark USD3.3 billion IPO, which was the South Korean carmaker’s first listing of a unit outside the country, was also the second-largest globally in 2024 to date.

The public float, which saw the listing of equity shares on the Bombay Stock Exchange and the National Stock Exchange of India, brought together an international lineup of legal advisers including Latham & Watkins, White & Case, Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co, and Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas.

Hong Kong, which for the first half of the year had grappled with an IPO slump amid a post-covid economic downturn, witnessed the largest debut on the city’s bourse in the past three years.

Advised by Skadden, Jia Yuan Law Offices, Shihui Partners, Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, and King & Wood Mallesons, China home appliance giant Midea Group raised more than HKD31 billion (USD3.98 billion) in its maiden public listing. The Hong Kong Stock Exchange (HKEX) filings showed that 18 cornerstone investors, including COSCO Shipping Holdings, UBS AM Singapore and BYD, had collectively committed nearly USD1.26 billion.

With companies chasing opportunities for growth and investment, law firms adapt to changing market dynamics, geopolitical pressures and client demand. These factors have driven law firm movements, from exits and downsizing in Greater China to expansions into emerging hubs like Singapore and global markets beyond Asia.

Law firm movements

2024 was a year marked, among other things, by a wave of international law firms, notably from the US, exiting from and downsizing their operations in Greater China amid ongoing geopolitical tensions and post-covid economic uncertainty in the world’s second-largest economy.

Within the first week of December, Paul Weiss and Milbank, confirmed their respective plans to pull out of mainland China with scheduled Beijing office closures, joining at least 10 foreign law firms that had announced the closure of their offices in the economic powerhouse in the past year.

Out of the 10 foreign law firms, all but one – Eversheds Sutherland from the UK – were US law firms, including Paul Weiss, one of the first internationals to have launched in mainland China with a Beijing office back in 1981.

But several UK and Asian law firms have come to identify opportunities in Greater China, playing a key part in driving a reverse of the US trend in 2024. In its latest Asia expansion, London-based DAC Beachcroft opened an office in Hong Kong in September, marking the UK firm’s second outfit in the region after its Singapore branch established in 2011.

In an interview with Asia Business Law Journal, partner Ross Risby, who launched the new Hong Kong office with partner Wai Yue Loh, said that his firm would focus on insurance, shipping, trading and commodities work in the city, serving clients including major international insurers such as Zurich Insurance Group and Allianz.

Rajah & Tann, one of Singapore’s four largest law firms, also announced in July the setup of an office in Qianhai, Shenzhen, scheduled for launch in the fourth quarter of this year. Patrick Ang, the firm’s managing partner, pointed to the growing trade and investment between China and Southeast Asia as a key factor for the establishment of the new office to meet the resulting client needs. He also added that the firm’s strengths in dispute resolution aligned with Qianhai’s objective of becoming an international arbitration centre.

While Singaporean law firms have been eyeing opportunities in China to further their regional expansion, Singapore itself has continued to attract foreign law firms from the US and Europe, as well as Asia, to set up shop and take advantage of the city-state’s developed financial and legal infrastructure, with a growing international arbitration scene.

Seladore Legal, a London-based disputes-only law firm, announced in early November its imminent plan to apply for a foreign law practice licence for its branch launch in the Lion City, which would be the firm’s first outfit in Asia and outside Europe. The UK firm had also hired Singaporean international arbitration lawyer Liang-Ying Tan as a partner for the planned Singapore office launch.

But, for many Asia-based firms, particularly those in Japan and mainland China, Singapore and other major regional cities and markets have already long been explored. For them, further international expansion has meant venturing out of the region into Europe and North America.

In the past year, four out of the five largest Japanese law firms – Nishimura & Asahi, Mori Hamada & Matsumoto, TMI Associates, and Nagashima Ohno & Tsunematsu – have expanded their global operations outside Asia.

Mori Hamada announced in early December its planned launch of a San Franscisco Bay Area office, its second base in the US after the New York branch, setting out to provide an Asia practice to clients based on the West Coast to tap technology and startup-related legal needs.

Nagashima Ohno, on the other hand, made an announced move in early November to launch a London office with the aim to build a pipeline of energy and environment-related work in Europe as Japanese companies remain active in those areas. Law firms adapt to ever-changing market demands and expand into new territories, while governments across Asia introduce regulatory reforms to address new challenges and opportunities. These changes – ranging from local content requirements to cybersecurity legislation and capital market oversight – help redefine the legal and business landscape. As a result, new compliance pressures arise. However, they also offer growth prospects for firms and businesses alike.

Regulations

In a move that captured global attention, Indonesia enforced its local content requirement (TKDN) policy, prohibiting Apple from selling its flagship iPhone 16 due to non-compliance with the 40% local content mandate. As the fourth-largest smartphone market globally, Indonesia’s regulatory framework commits to strengthening domestic industries by promoting technological capability and supporting local suppliers.

Apple’s initial USD100 million investment proposal fell short, prompting the tech giant to rethink its strategy. By year-end, Indonesia’s investment minister had announced that Apple had committed to a USD1 billion investment, a significant shift that includes the establishment of a full-scale manufacturing plant in Indonesia. This development marks a turning point in how global companies align with local policies to maintain market presence.

On a different note, the cybersecurity landscape saw pivotal regulatory shifts in 2024, with Malaysia, Singapore and Australia introducing landmark legislation to address emerging threats.

Malaysia’s Cyber Security Act 2024, effective from 26 August, introduced stringent measures for national critical information infrastructure (NCII), including mandatory risk assessments, incident reporting and a licensing regime for cybersecurity service providers. Non-compliance carries severe penalties, including hefty fines and imprisonment, underscoring Malaysia’s commitment to fortifying its digital infrastructure.

In Singapore, amendments to the Cybersecurity Act 2018 through the Cybersecurity Bill addressed evolving risks and industry practices, broadening regulatory coverage and impacting stakeholders. The amendments address recent technological developments and changes in industry practices. The coverage addresses evolving cybersecurity risks and represents a timely update to the cybersecurity regulatory framework in Singapore.

Meanwhile, Australia enacted its first standalone Cyber Security Act, introducing obligations such as ransomware payment reporting and enhanced incident response protocols, setting a new standard for cybersecurity governance.

Vietnam, too, embraced legal reforms by overhauling its land law framework. Land Law 2024 was approved on 18 January and took effect on 1 August, marking a significant overhaul of its land regulatory framework. Set to replace the 2013 law, the updated legislation aims to foster transparency and stimulate real estate market growth.

Key changes include refined land rental payment provisions, expanded rights for users under land rental exemptions and a more transparent expropriation process. Investors are given limited leeway to propose land acquisition methods, reflecting the government’s focus on balancing development with regulatory integrity.

“These regulatory developments demonstrated the firm commitments and actions of the Vietnamese authorities to undertake the real actions to tackle and remove the practical legal obstacles for investment and businesses in Vietnam,” says Ngoc Anh Bui, managing partner of VILAF’s Hanoi office.

In China, the revised Measures for the Administration of the Provision of Securities Legal Services by Law Firms, implemented in late 2023, saw its full impact unfold in 2024. These measures expanded the supervision of securities legal practices, now including overseas offerings and listings by domestic companies.

“For lawyers whose main area of practice is securities, the revision and the official implementation of [the measures] has been the most challenging development,” says Jian Hai Luan, a partner at Commerce & Finance Law Offices in Beijing.

The measures were revised and promulgated in October 2023 and implemented on 1 December 2023, but their impact on the securities law industry was not truly reflected until 2024, Luan told Asia Business Law Journal.

“Law firms faced increased scrutiny through periodic reporting requirements, on-site inspections and stricter compliance mandates. The heightened regulatory pressure posed significant challenges, particularly for firms managing cross-border securities practices,” says Luan.

The second half of 2024 saw a resurgence in Hong Kong’s IPO market, driven by stricter vetting processes for A-share listings in mainland China. This tightening redirected many Chinese companies to seek listings in Hong Kong, bolstering its capital markets activity.

Additionally, the reintroduction of Hong Kong’s original listing procedures encouraged activity on the GEM (Growth Enterprise Market) board and revived interest in transitioning to the HKEX main board. These changes highlight the evolving interplay between mainland and Hong Kong capital markets, with Hong Kong reclaiming its status as a preferred destination for IPOs.

“The IPO market in Hong Kong has been very bad in the past few years, but, since the second half of 2024, there has been a rebound in activity largely due to the tightening of the vetting process for A-share listing applications on the mainland,” says Eric Lui, managing partner at Ince & Co in Hong Kong.

_{Images are for reference only.Images and contents gathered automatic from google or 3rd party sources.All rights on the images and contents are with their legal original owners.}