May 30, 2016

RHTLaw Taylor Wessing announces Intellectual Property & Technology Partner hire

RHTLaw Taylor Wessing is pleased to announce the addition of Ms Kong Seh Ping as a Partner in our Intellectual Property & Technology Practice with effect from 23 May 2016. Seh Ping specialises in corporate and commercial transactions across sectors and jurisdictions, with a particular focus on the technology and telecommunications sectors. She regularly advises start-ups on financing, investments, joint ventures, general employment law, and commercialisation of intellectual property rights in the Asia Pacific region (including licensing, franchising and technology transfer). In addition, Seh Ping has extensive experience in cross border M&A transactions, FDIs and joint ventures in Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia and the Philippines. She was ranked as a leading lawyer in the M&A category by the AsiaLaw Leading Lawyers 2013. Some of her notable transactions include: Advising Grey Orange Pte Ltd, a Singapore technology company which caters to warehousing and automation space in providing disruptive technology to make innovative products for efficient logistics and distribution, in connection with a Series A funding round from Tiger Global, Blume Ventures, Alok Rawat (President of FG Wilson FZE), Dileep Nath (co-founder Kanbay acquired by CapGemini) and other angel investors; Advising MoneyMax Financial Services Ltd in respect of its first overseas investment to hold the majority stake, through a own wholly-owned subsidiary, in a network of Malaysian pawnshops; and Advising Omya AG, one of the largest calcium carbonate producers in the world, in respect of its acquisition of chemicals distribution businesses in Indonesia and the Philippines respectively, and on mining related acquisitions and joint ventures in Bhutan, Malaysia and the Philippines respectively.
May 27, 2016

RHT Rajan Menon Foundation Charity Golf 2016 raised S$265,200 for beneficiaries, more than doubling last year’s figure

RHTLaw Taylor Wessing and RHT Holdings (“RHT”) today hosted the RHT Rajan Menon Foundation Charity Golf 2016, raising S$265,200 in support of the World Wide Fund for Nature, Singapore (WWF-Singapore), The Straits Times School Pocket Money Fund (STSPMF) and National Gallery Singapore. Into its second year, today’s event drew sponsorships that more than doubled the funds raised during the inaugural event last year. Guest-of-Honour Associate Professor Ho Peng Kee, Patron of the RHT Rajan Menon Foundation, was on hand to grace this year’s charity golf event. “For many years, community development goals were philanthropic activities that were seen as separate from business objectives. This is now changing. At RHT, we recognise that cutting-edge innovation and competitive advantage can result from weaving social and environmental considerations into business strategy. The RHT Rajan Menon Foundation is a serious and committed catalyst that hopes to inspire mindset change in the wider business community,” said Mr Tan Chong Huat, Chairman of RHT Rajan Menon Foundation and Managing Partner of RHTLaw Taylor Wessing LLP. Sponsorships for this year’s event were gathered from a wide spectrum of organisations. Key sponsors comprised Chow Tai Fook Charity Foundation (Singapore), Qilin World Capital Ltd, Smartflex Technology Pte Ltd, Metropolitan Machinery Pte Ltd, Ascendas Singbridge Pte Ltd, Hanwell Holdings Limited, Dyna-Mac Engineering Services Pte Ltd and Union Steel Holdings Limited. Concluding with his comments on the RHT Rajan Menon Foundation Charity Golf 2016, Jayaprakash  Jagateesan, CEO of RHT Holdings, remarked “The success of the RHT Rajan Menon Foundation’s fundraising comes down to our donors’ willingness and enthusiasm in stepping forward with their donations and sponsorships. Giving back to the community has always been at the heart of RHT’s mission. Today’s beneficiaries are part of the Foundation’s long term goal to widen our corporate social responsibility contributions from the community to the environment and to the arts. We hope the charity golf event will be a spark to light the passion for doing good.” Today’s charity golf event drew over 130 golfers and 210 participants who came together for the Gala Celebrations Dinner which included a charity auction. The RHT Rajan Menon Foundation Charity Golf is a key charitable endeavour in the RHT Rajan Menon Foundation’s annual philanthropic calendar. The RHT Rajan Menon Foundation Charity Golf 2016 was featured in the 28 May 2016 edition of The Straits Times.
May 26, 2016

RHTLaw Taylor Wessing shortlisted as Visionary Law Firm of the Year by In-House Community

RHTLaw Taylor Wessing has been shortlisted as Visionary Law Firm of the Year by In-House Community 2016. The In-House Community Research team have set the challenge for New Silk Road-based legal service providers to demonstrate that they can truly stand inside the shoes of their clients and proffer inspiring service. The team canvassed 100 legal providers and asked them to provide examples of the following: budget-orientated project management for a client advice to a client regarding productivity and efficiency exceeding client expectations (inclusive of client testimonials) The winner will be decided solely by independent judges.
May 26, 2016

RHTLaw Taylor Wessing Intellectual Property & Technology Partner Rizwi Wun and Senior Associate Jack Ow authored an article titled “The Swift attacks: should you be worried?” for The Business Times

RHTLaw Taylor Intellectual Property & Technology Partner Rizwi Wun and Senior Associate Jack Ow authored an article titled “The Swift attacks: should you be worried?” for The Business Times. The article was first published in The Business Times on 26 May 2016.  The Swift attacks: should you be worried? SWIFT, or the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication, is a messaging network that financial institutions use to securely transmit information and instructions through a standardised system of codes. This is an established and trusted system used by many banks for the payment of funds. Source: The Business Times Date: 26 May 2016 Author: Rizwi Wun and Jack Ow However, the recent spate of reports of actual and perceived cyber threats to banks and other financial institutions - going through the Swift payment system - has raised alarms with widespread repercussions: In February, Bangladesh Bank (the country's central bank) was reported to have lost US$81 million when hackers infiltrated its computer systems for authentic Swift codes to make fraudulent payment instructions on the central bank's accounts at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. In May, it emerged that Vietnam's Tien Phong Commercial Joint Stock Bank was subject to a similar computer attack through the bank's Swift payment system last December for more than US$1.13 million, but the bank fortunately managed to foil the attempt. A third case has emerged this same month. In a lawsuit filed in New York by Ecuador's Banco del Austro, Wells Fargo in the US is facing claims for failing to prevent fraudulent transfers of about US$12 million to bank accounts in Hong Kong that were requested over the Swift payment system in January 2015. It is believed that the funds were stolen through properly processed wire instructions received via authenticated Swift messages originating from hackers. As a result, confidence and trust in the Swift payment system has been somewhat shattered, perhaps even irretrievably. It would be naive to believe that banks are the only affected parties. As a backbone of international banking, the Swift payment system has traditionally been relied upon for its integrity to authenticate and fulfil payments. Anyone who relies on the banking system for any trade and money transfers would inevitably be exposed to risk of loss resulting from compromises in the Swift payment system. So what does all this mean for Swift and, more importantly, for all who rely on this trusted payment system? This raises the issue of to whom bank customers can attribute fault and liability for such loss arising from fraudulent payment instructions. If customers wish to take action against the paying bank, they will need to show their bank was reckless or negligent in failing to be alert to fraudulent payment instructions. The role of Swift also cannot be ruled out. However, what cannot be denied is that the weakness in its own system allowed the cyber criminals to gain access to its system, to begin with. Realistically, this might mean a migration of massive numbers of organisations to a new payment system - or, alternatively, introducing vast improvements to the security measures of the existing system. If the first option requires organisations to undertake a massive infrastructural switch, then this could pose a massive logistical and administrative challenge to the banks currently using the Swift payment system. The intentions behind the second option may be good, but brings no reassurance that the pre-existing threat would be removed, given the sophistication of cyber criminals. All the concerned reaction and discussion among the higher echelons of the global banking and financial industry in re-evaluating the current Swift system or seeking assurances from Swift does not address the main problems, which are that: There is no guarantee that there will not be a recurrence of the cyber threats, even with a new system; and The cyber criminals - the actual culprits executing this - are not being stopped. However, all is not lost. There is a school of thought that these attacks will accelerate the rise in the application of blockchain technology as the solution to the current problem. We reliably understand that Swift has already commenced a blockchain initiative. It has also been reported that steps have already been taken by several banks throughout the world to conduct extensive research and development of blockchain technology as an alternative means of payment system. It is not yet clear how long the banks will take to create a new workable system. In today's fast-paced world, blockchain technology has some unattractive qualities, but at least its possible availability means that an alternative payment system could nonetheless be used, albeit at a much slower pace. Other organisations have far advanced technology that would enable early and effective detection of cyber attacks. Many have already developed technologies to help organisations know early on whether they have suffered cyber intrusions. This is not a panacea to all the ills that could flow from a cyber breach, but in this case, being forewarned is definitely being forearmed. The only possible major stumbling block in gaining access to such technologies could possibly be the added cost of using them. So, in effect: Subject to affordability, there is technology available to assist companies to detect cyber attacks early on; Assuming blockchain technology takes off, it could assume the mantle of the new payment system standard; and There is always the fallback solution of cyber security insurance that could help defray some of the compensation payable. Banks should take heart from the fact that regulators worldwide have been viewing this threat seriously, and are monitoring the situation closely with Swift. The emergence of this new threat could be viewed as a catalyst for greater research into technologies for authenticity and verification within payment systems as part of a necessary evolution of the system against this new cyber threat. It would also spur greater collaborative and coordinated industry-led action between regulators and all stakeholders to address the threats to the payment system.