DOCSLIB.ORG

Deals of the Year 2007

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Deals of the Year 2007 Deals of the Year 2007 The rise of Asian economic superpowers continued in 2007, marking a busy year for legal professionals. In recognition of the outstanding work of law firms in the region, Asian-Counsel fetes the top Asia- Pacific deals in our annual special feature. The strength of the legal marketplace was well reflected in the large number of submissions we received in our search for the year’s best deals. Hundreds of deals from dozens of firms ranging from Australia, China, India, Indonesia, Hong Kong, Japan, Malaysia, the Middle East, Singapore, South Korea, Thailand and Vietnam all threw their hats into the ring this year, making competition fiercer than ever. Winning deals were selected based on their size, complexity and uniqueness, and are listed chronologically by date of completion. Within the deals themselves, firms are listed alphabetically. Additionally, honourable mentions were allotted to those deals which while not making the final cut were of an exceptional nature. Congratulations to all the firms involved in our Deals of the Year 2007! Cover Story Asian-Counsel Deals of the Year FEBRUARY 2007 requiring that the district court first conclusively establish APRIL 2007 he deal represents only the second ever simultaneous personal jurisdiction over Sinochem before granting a TA+H share dual listing on the Hong Kong and motion to dismiss on the ground of forum non conven- Shanghai Stock Exchanges, and the largest ever A-share Reliance Communications Ltd – iens. The decision marks the first time a Chinese com- China CITIC Bank IPO offering in terms of total public subscription. Importantly, pany managed to move from the district to Supreme court the deal marks an offer of a Chinese-funded company with JP Morgan US$1 billion convertible level, and to gain a victory in doing so. Moreover, of the the lowest price-sensitivity to order price during the IPO bond thousands of plea applications received each year by the INITIAL PUBLIC OFFERING process, and represents the second largest public offering Supreme court, only around 20 cases are heard. in Hong Kong of a Chinese-funded bank. Shares of China The victory may have important consequences in Deal value: US$5.95 billion CITIC Bank, the seventh-largest bank in China based on INDIAN CONVERTIBLE BOND OFFERING future cases brought in US courts against non-US com- Practice areas: Corporate; PRC; Commerce & assets, doubled on the first day of trading. panies having little or no connection to the United Finance Deal value: US$1 billion States, enabling them to seek prompt dismissals on the Practice areas: Banking and Finance grounds of forum non-conveniens, without requiring The firms Corporate Debt Restructuring the federal courts to make a conclusive, oftentimes Commerce & Finance Law Offices (legal advisors to The firms costly and prolonged, inquiry into jurisdiction. the underwriters as to PRC law); Freshfields Bruckhaus of Mycom Berhad and Olympia Amarchand Mangaldas & Suresh A. Shroff (as advisor Deringer (legal advisor to CICC, CITIC Securities, Industries Berhad to the joint lead managers as to Indian law); Allen & Citigroup, HSBC and Lehman Brothers as to Hong Gledhill (as Singapore listing agent); Linklaters (as advi- Privatisation of Tom Online Kong and US law); King & Wood (legal advisors to sor to the trustee as to English law) CITIC Bank as to PRC law); Skadden, Arps, Slate, CORPORATE DEBT RESTRUCTURING by Tom Group Ltd Meagher & Flom (legal advisors to CITIC Bank as to his transaction represented the largest Indian convert- Hong Kong and US law) Deal value: US$300 million Tible bond offering to date. Proceeds raised by the PRIVATISATION Practice areas: Corporate Debt Restructuring Issuer were for capital expenditure reasons. The result was the listing of US$1 billion Zero Coupon Convertible Deal value: HK1.77 billion Bonds due in 2012. The Bonds are convertible into Practice areas: Commercial Ordinary Shares or Global Depositary Shares representing Ordinary Shares of Reliance Communications Limited. The firms Allen & Overy (Hong Kong counsel to target); Appleby (Cayman counsel to bidder); Cleary Gottlieb Steen & MARCH 2007 Hamilton LLP (US counsel to Goldman Sachs); Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer (Hong Kong advisors to Goldman, as Sinochem Supreme Court Victory financial advisers to TOM Group); Linklaters (advisors to Tom Group Ltd); Maples & Calder (Cayman counsel to target); Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison (US UNANIMOUS US SUPREME COURT VICTORY counsel to the target Tom Online); Woo, Kwan, Lee & Lo (Hong Kong counsel to bidder) Deal value: Not susceptible for valuation Practice areas: Dispute Resolution his deal was made interesting by the fact that the Ttarget was incorporated in the Cayman Islands and The firm had dual listings on the Growth Enterprise Market in Hong Jones Day (representing Sinochem International Kong and on NASDAQ in the US. Therefore the privatisa- Company Ltd) tion was subject to the scrutiny of securities regulators in two jurisdictions and the court in a third jurisdiction. The n an important dispute involving the jurisdictional possible privatisation was a major transaction for the Irules that apply in US federal courts, the unanimous bidder so it had to obtain shareholder consent prior to finding of the Supreme Court reversed an earlier ruling making the privatisation proposal. 26 ASIAN-COUNSEL JANUARY / FEBRUARY 2008 27 Cover Story Asian-Counsel Deals of the Year The firms fixing, and applications for leniency soon followed. Yet 6th Floor, Faber Imperial Court Tel: +603 2078 5588 Languages: English, Bahasa Malaysia, Albar & Partners (counsel to the domestic lenders); Jeff after a review of the relevant materials, the KFTC Jalan Sultan Ismail, Fax: +603 2072 2129 Tamil, Cantonese, Mandarin Leong Poon & Wong (solicitors for Mycom and Olympia closed the case alleging price fixing by four global 50250 Kuala Lumpur Email: [email protected] group of companies) DRAM manufacturers (Micron Technology, Inc., Malaysia Contact: Number of Lawyers: 35 Syed Zaid Albar, Managing Partner Infineon Technologies AG, Samsung, Hynix), citing his is one of Malaysia’s biggest corporate debt insufficient evidence. The decision exonerated Hynix THE FIRM’S ORIGINS: restructuring schemes for the settlement and repay- Semiconductor Inc. (Hynix) from an approximately T Albar & Partners’ origins can be traced back to 1981, when its founding and currently Managing Partner, Syed Zaid Albar, ment of the total aggregate indebtedness of Mycom, US$18.3 million fine that it had been ordered to established the firm under the name of Albar & Co. It is today a medium-sized law firm based in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Olympia and their groups of companies. The restructur- pay. The case may be regarded as a touchstone in rela- with a partnership size of 12 and over 35 fee earners. ing scheme involved conversion of the outstanding tion to the scope of extraterritorial application of anti- loans into shares and various other securities, including trust law. THE FIRM’S PRACTICE AREAS: the issuance of new ordinary shares, redeemable unse- The firm’s practice covers the whole spectrum of banking & finance and business activities. In particular, the firm has active practice teams in the fields of Banking & Finance, Debt Capital Markets, Islamic Finance, Project Finance and cured loan stocks, irredeemable convertible bonds and MAY 2007 Corporate / Commercial Law services. It has led in the development of innovative financing and debt restructuring irredeemable unsecured loan stocks to the respective solutions for corporations, as well as large lender groups. It is also at the forefront of development in the area of Asset lenders and creditors. Backed Securitisation and REITs. Nikko Cordial-Citigroup We pride ourselves as being one of the nation’s pioneers in the area of Islamic Finance. We have worked with many dif- ferent Syariah advisers from both local and international Islamic financial institutions and have access to some of the leading Islamic practitioners in Malaysia and also the Middle East. SHARE EXCHANGE AGREEMENT The firm’s Corporate & Commercial practice group is known for its ability to work closely with its clients in their corpo- Deal value: US$15 billion rate exercises such as Mergers, de-mergers, Restructuring, Takeovers, Acquisitions and Corporate Finance. Practice areas: Mergers & Acquisitions The firm also covers a broad area of Banking and Commercial Litigation, which includes Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution. The firm’s Senior Litigation Partner, Datuk N Chandran, is a pre-eminent advocate and arbitrator of The firms exceptional calibre, with over 39 years of active practice at the Bar, and is often instructed as counsel in the nation’s Mori Hamada & Matsumoto (counsel to Nikko Cordial Appellate Courts. Corporation); David Polk & Wardwell (for Nikko Cordial in connection with the buyout of its minority shareholders); Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & SOME NOTABLE TRANSACTIONS ADVISED BY ALBAR & PARTNERS RECENTLY INCLUDE: Garrison LLP (legal advisor to bidder); Nishimura & Asahi (legal advisor to bidder); Morrison & Foerster UÊ Islamic Debt Securities: acted for Telekom Malaysia Berhad (“TM”), a leading integrated telecommunications com- pany in Malaysia, in relation to the issuance of RM1 billion Sukuk Ijarah by Menara ABS Bhd, which is backed by Hynix DRAM Price Fixing (counsel to the joint financial advisors); Morgan Lewis assets originated from TM. This landmark deal created a significant and unique class of Islamic Debt Securities that – TMI (counsel to Citigroup) incorporated the features of both a fixed income instrument, as well as an investment in a portfolio of high quality property assets; PRICE FIXING he strategic alliance and corresponding UÊ Islamic Stapled Securities: acted for the issuers, Hijrah Pertama Berhad and TM, in relation to the RM3 billion Tacquisition in this deal were conducted in the Islamic Stapled Income Securities issued under the principles of Ijarah. The issuance was the first Syariah-compliant Deal value: US$18.3 million middle of the nationwide accounting scandal of Stapled Income Securities ever structured and issued globally.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Japan Patent & Trademark Update
    TMI Associates Issue9 (March 2018) Japan Patent & Please note that there is one exception to this rule in a Invalidation rate of JPO patent invalidation trials FRAND case. We will discuss this exception – i.e. the “Abuse Trademark Update of Rights” theory - in a future issue of our newsletter. (2) Second reason : High patentee success rate The actual patentee success rate in patent infringement litigation in Japan is 43%, a similar rate to that seen in Delaware in 2016. This rate is calculated based on the number of lawsuits concluded from 2014 to 2016. The graph below shows the details of the judgments and settlements at the district court level. When discussing the patentee success rate, settlements should be considered because a significant number of cases (34%) reach settlement in Japan, as you can see in the graph below. Contents Specifically, while the invalidation rate at the JPO was as high should also be considered as an additional or an alternate Details of judgments and settlements as 70% over 10 years ago, it has continued to decrease and venue for patent disputes due to three not widely known 1. Patent Lawsuits in Japan has remained relatively stable at around 20 to 30% in the past reasons: (1) automatic injunctions, (2) reasonably high patentee – What You Need to Know several years. The stability of patent rights as you see above is success rate, and (3) reasonably low invalidation rate. In this to Resolve Cross–Border Patent Disputes an important factor when considering a venue for patent article, we would like to explain these three reasons in depth infringement litigation.
    [Show full text]
  • Workshop Für Fortgeschrittene Studenten*, Referendare* Und Rechtsanwälte*
    Workshop für fortgeschrittene Studenten*, Referendare* und Rechtsanwälte* Nehmen Sie an unserem interaktiven Workshop teil und erleben Sie, dass sich Großkanzlei und angenehme, lockere Arbeits- Teilnehmerstimmen zu atmosphäre nicht ausschließen! Lernen Sie die interessanten unseren bisherigen Aufgaben und Herausforderungen eines Wirtschaftsanwalts Workshops kennen und sprechen Sie mit Berufseinsteigern sowie erfahrenen Anwälten. „klare Darstellung und Einführung in bisher Wo und wann? unbekannte Bereiche“ Simmons & Simmons, Düsseldorf, Mittwoch, 7. November 2018, 11.00-18.00 Uhr mit anschließendem Abendprogramm „viel Interesse an den Bewerbern selbst“ Unsere Themen: • Verhandlungstraining durch einen Profi mit anschließender „gute Einbindung der Simulation Teilnehmer“ • Erwerb eines IT-Unternehmens aus gesellschaftsrechtlicher, arbeits- und IP-rechtlicher Sicht „die Fragen an das Publikum • Karriere-Speed Dating: Anwälte und Anwältinnen verschiedener und die Gelegenheit zu Senioritätsstufen stehen Ihnen für Ihre Karrierefragen zur Rückfragen waren sehr gut“ Verfügung „die Referenten haben Wenn Sie überdurchschnittliche Rechts- und Englischkenntnisse sowie Interesse für wirtschaftliche Zusammenhänge mitbringen, dann Interesse an den jeweiligen bewerben Sie sich bei uns. Gebieten wecken können“ Wir freuen uns auf Sie! „alle waren sehr offen“ Nähere Informationen finden Sie auf „schöne Kombination aus simmons-simmons.de/workshops Lernen und Anwenden neuer Materie“ Sollten Sie Fragen haben, stehen wir Ihnen gerne zur Verfügung. Manuela Gillich
    [Show full text]
  • Lex 100 P014-024 Winners.Qxp 17/08/2007 15:08 Page 14
    Lex 100 p014-024 Winners.qxp 17/08/2007 15:08 Page 14 Job satisfaction How would you rate your overall job satisfaction? Lex 100 winners 1 Farrer & Co 9.10 2 Harbottle & Lewis LLP 9.00 Analysis = McDermott Will & Emery UK LLP 9.00 This important category is topped this year by Farrer & Co in what’s = Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (UK) LLP 9.00 been a highly impressive overall performance – the firm appears in every single one of our Lex 100 5 Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP 8.75 Winners tables, often near the top, the first firm to do so. So why is this 6 Covington & Burling LLP 8.71 mid-sized London firm so popular with trainees? It certainly sounds a fun place 7 Latham & Watkins 8.67 to work and offers six seats in a wide variety of practice areas. There’s a strong 8 Ashfords 8.63 bond between current trainees, who praise the ‘great people and great mix of work’, ‘unique atmosphere’ and ‘sheer breadth of training = Stephens & Scown 8.63 opportunities’. Media boutique Harbottle & Lewis comes next. Trainees here feel they have ‘considerably 10 Bristows 8.60 better quality work than peers, better experience and more exposure’. Then, as last year, there’s a strong showing = Shoosmiths 8.60 by five US firms: McDermott Will & Emery, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, Cleary Gottlieb, Covington & 12 Browne Jacobson LLP 8.58 Burling and Latham & Watkins. These firms have not been offering training contracts for that long in London and all have 13 Birketts 8.50 limited intakes.
    [Show full text]
  • Roisin Higgins QC
    Advocates Library, Parliament House, Edinburgh, EH1 1RF Telephone: 0131 226 2881 Facsimile : 0131 225 3642 DX ED 549302, Edinburgh 36, LP3 Edinburgh 10 Roisin Higgins QC Year of Call: 2000 Year of Silk: 2015 [email protected] 07739 639083 Professional Career to date Devil Masters: Ian Duguid QC, W James Wolffe QC. 2015: Year of silk 2000: Year of call September 1997 - September 1999:Solicitor, McGrigors (Edinburgh office), Commercial Litigation Department September 1995 - September 1997:Trainee Solicitor, Maclay Murray & Spens (Edinburgh and London offices). Training included experience in commercial litigation, commercial property, venture capital, and mergers and acquisitions. Education & Professional Qualifications Lord Reid Scholarship: (1999-2000) LLB (Hons), Dip LP, University of Glasgow (1990-1995) Areas of Expertise Commercial Contracts Commercial Property Construction and Engineering Intellectual Property Rights Media Law Professional Experience Roisin practised as a solicitor for two years before calling to the Bar in 2000. Since then, she has pursued a practice in commercial litigation and has developed a particular specialism in intellectual property law. In that sphere, she has significant experience in: (i) pharmaceutical and medical patent disputes; (ii) oil and gas patent disputes; (iii) parallel importation of trade marked goods; (iv) trade mark protection for large businesses; (v) protection of copyright and design rights; (vi) broadcasting rights under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988; and (vi) providing advice to football clubs and cricket and rugby associations in relation to trade mark rights, image rights and rights in footage of sporting events. She is a door tenant at 8 New Square, Lincoln's Inn. Recent Cases East Dunbartonshire Council v Bett Homes Ltd.
    [Show full text]
  • Japan Patent & Trademark Update
    TMI Associates Issue7 (July 2017) Japan Patent & The reason for this misconception could be that some in the below graph, in 70% of patent infringement lawsuits First, as shown in the below graph, the number of patent In sum, the decrease in the total number of patent applications by 2007; however, the Defendant continued using the articles discuss statistics regarding Japanese patent the judges did not make any decisions on the validity of the applications filed from the other IP5 countries does not show seems to have mostly come from the change in patent filing trademark “Eemax”. The Plaintiff sued the Defendant for Unfair Trademark Update lawsuits based only on those cases which have reached a patents. Further, in 43% of patent infringement lawsuits, such a decrease. Rather, the number of patent applications filed policy, i.e., shifting the focus from quantity to quality Competition asserting that the Defendant’s use of “Eemax” was judgment. The information on settled cases, as shown in even though the plaintiffs made invalidation arguments, the by U.S. entities has actually been increasing since 2013. of patents, and not as a result of any decrease in the impermissible given that it is a well-known trademark of the the above graph, was not announced before, and such judges still did not make any decisions with respect to validity. importance of obtaining patent protection in Japan. Plaintiff, even if the Plaintiff had not registered the mark. In success rate could previously only be examined based on In other words, it is inappropriate to derive any significant Number of patent applications filed by foreign entities response, the Defendant filed a counterclaim asserting that the cases in which judgments were rendered.
    [Show full text]
  • Trainee Handbook
    THE QUEEN‟S UNIVERSITY OF BELFAST INSTITUTE OF PROFESSIONAL LEGAL STUDIES Trainee Handbook What you need to know about the day-to-day life of the Institute Please note that this Handbook should be read in conjunction with the „on-line‟ information regarding the course. Appendices 1 Regulations for the Postgraduate Diploma in Professional Legal Studies. 2 On-line Legal Resources available to Institute trainees. 3 University Student Anti-Bullying and Harassment Policy. 4 IPLS Procedure for Maintenance and Enhancement of Standards and Quality. 5 Fire Safety. 6 (a) Bar Programme Specification (b) Solicitor Programme Specification 2011-2012 Edition 2 Introduction Dear trainee, On behalf of all our staff may I welcome you to the Institute of Professional Legal Studies. We are delighted to have you join us here and we hope that you will gain much from your time at the Institute. We are all committed to providing you with the very best in vocational legal training. This handbook is intended to help you maximise your time at the Institute by providing easy access to most of the information which you will need about our policies and procedures. Along with the handbook you will find a certificate stating that you have read the handbook and that you will abide by our policies. You will be expected to sign this certificate when you enrol. Throughout your time at the Institute it will be assumed that you know the contents of the handbook and you may find that you encounter considerable difficulties if you do not. We look forward to working with you.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of the First Year of PRIME
    Evaluation of the first year of PRIME November 2012 Authors: Kelly Kettlewell, Clare Southcott, Gill Featherstone, Eleanor Stevens and Caroline Sharp, National Foundation for Educational Research (NFER). For all media enquiries please contact: Guy Nicholls, Allen & Overy. Telephone: 020 3088 4176 Email [email protected] Published in November 2012 by the National Foundation for Educational Research, The Mere, Upton Park, Slough, Berkshire SL1 2DQ www.nfer.ac.uk © National Foundation for Educational Research 2012 Registered Charity No. 313392 ISBN 978-1-908666-36-9 How to cite this publication: Kettlewell, K., Southcott, C., Featherstone, G., Stevens, E. and Sharp, C. (2012). Evaluation of the First Year of PRIME. Slough: NFER. Contents Executive summary i Key findings from the first year of PRIME i Conclusion ii 1. Introduction 1 1.1 What is PRIME? 2 1.2 Who is eligible for a placement through PRIME? 2 2. What proportion of students met the PRIME criteria? 4 3. Recruitment and engagement 5 3.1 Who were the students on PRIME placements? 5 3.2 Awareness and access to the legal profession 6 3.3 How did firms, brokers and schools begin working together on PRIME? 7 3.4 How did representatives use the PRIME criteria to select students? 8 4. PRIME placements: content and satisfaction 10 4.1 How satisfied were students with PRIME? 10 4.2 How did firms structure their placements? 12 4.3 What activities did firms offer students? 12 4.4 How were schools involved in PRIME placements? 14 5. Impact on students 16 5.1 What impact have the placements had on students’ skills development? 16 5.2 What impact have the placements had on students’ knowledge and understanding? 18 5.3 What impact did the placements have on students’ future plans? 19 6.
    [Show full text]
  • Tokyo, Japan TMI ASSOCIATES Roppongi Hills Mori Tower Tokyo
    III NextGen Leadership Program and Class V Induction June 5, 2016: Tokyo, Japan TMI ASSOCIATES Roppongi Hills Mori Tower Tokyo Courtesy of III Member Mitsue Aizawa CONFERENCE FACULTY CONFERENCE CO-CHAIRS Mitsue Aizawa E. Bruce Leonard TMI Associates, Tokyo Miller Thomson LLP, Toronto Donald S. Bernstein Maurice Fleming Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP, New York NextGen Nomination Director Miller Thomson LLP, Toronto Alan Bloom Ernst & Young, London Franca Tibando NextGen Executive Director Prof. Hon. Samuel L. Bufford Miller Thomson LLP, Toronto Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA Shinchiro Abe Kasumigaseki International Law Office Thomas M. Gaa NextGen Tokyo Organizing Committee Bialson, Bergen & Schwab, Palo Alto Prof. Christoph Paulus Humboldt University, Berlin Hon. James M. Peck Morrison & Foerster LLP, New York Nominated Delegates Class V Ethan J. Birnberg Erin Broderick Lindquist & Vennum LLP Baker & McKenzie LLP 600 17th Street, Suite 1800 South 300 East Randolph Street, Suite 5000 Denver, CO 80202 USA Chicago, Illinois 60601 USA Tel: 303.454.0534 Tel: 312.861.8935 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Nominator Nominator Hon. Sidney B. Brooks Eberhard Nietzer United States Bankruptcy Court, District of Colorado Amtsgericht Heilbronn Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Margie Chan Dr. Jason Corbett Davis Polk & Wardwell Silk Legal Co., Ltd. Hong Kong Solicitors RSU Tower, 8th Floor, Suite 805 The Hong Kong Club Building 571 Sukhumvit Road, North Klongton 3A Chater Road, 18/F Hong Kong Watthana, Bangkok, Thailand 10110 Tel: +852 2533 3325 Tel: +66 (0)2107-2007 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Nominator Nominator Donald S.
    [Show full text]
  • Discussion Paper on Heritable Securities: Pre-Default
    (DISCUSSION PAPER No.168) Discussion Paper on Heritable Securities: Pre-default discussion paper Discussion Paper on Heritable Securities: Pre-default June 2019 DISCUSSION PAPER No 168 This Discussion Paper is published for comment and criticism and does not represent the final views of the Scottish Law Commission NOTES 1. Please note that information about this Discussion Paper, including copies of responses, may be made available in terms of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002. Any confidential response will be dealt with in accordance with the 2002 Act. We may also (i) publish responses on our website (either in full or in some other way such as re-formatted or summarised); and (ii) attribute comments and publish a list of respondents' names. 2. Where possible, we would prefer electronic submission of comments. A downloadable electronic response form for this paper as well as a general comments form are available on our website. Alternatively, our general email address is [email protected]. 3. Please note that all hyperlinks in this document were checked for accuracy at the time of final draft. 4. If you have any difficulty in reading this document, please contact us and we will do our best to assist. You may wish to note that the pdf version of this document available on our website has been tagged for accessibility. 5. © Crown copyright 2019 You may re-use this publication (excluding logos and any photographs) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0. To view this licence visit http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3; or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 4DU; or email [email protected].
    [Show full text]
  • Europe - the Next Legal IT Frontier
    The leader in legal technology news Issue 159 Europe - the next legal IT frontier Some UK legal IT suppliers are talking about breaking into the United States. Others are taking a crack at the Asia-Pacific market but if last week’s Lex Connect Europe event in Amsterdam was anything to go by, Continental Europe is the most promising marketplace of all. This view is echoed by Derk Kropholler, the vice president of sales at Solution 6 Europe, who predicts that the greatest growth in legal IT sales over the next couple of years will be in Continental Europe. Three factors are currently driving the European market. The first is the pending expansion of the EU, with law firms from the new accession states wanting to gear up so they can compete on an international basis. The second factor is a European-wide drift Buying trends - inertia away from local legacy systems vendors, to the big international rules OK ! suppliers - such as Elite and Solution 6 - who are perceived as the only ones who can provide the latest technologies. The Insider has completed its latest informal The third factor is the growing number of mid-sized European survey of legal IT buying trends. This commercial practices who believe they can carve a niche because confirms that the UK market is enjoying one the large UK and US-based multinational firms, who dominate of its busiest periods since the late 1990s but the top end of the market, do not really understand the region or there were some anomalous findings... the legal culture and are failing to provide the services European For example, our research found that businesses want.
    [Show full text]
  • Report on Review of Contract Law: Formation, Interpretation, Remedies for Breach, and Penalty Clauses
    (SCOT LAW COM No 252) Report on Review of Contract Law: Formation, Interpretation, Remedies for Breach, and Penalty Clauses report Report on Review of Contract Law: Formation, Interpretation, Remedies for Breach, and Penalty Clauses Laid before the Scottish Parliament by the Scottish Ministers under section 3(2) of the Law Commissions Act 1965 March 2018 SCOT LAW COM No 252 SG/2018/34 The Scottish Law Commission was set up by section 2 of the Law Commissions Act 1965 (as amended) for the purpose of promoting the reform of the law of Scotland. The Commissioners are: The Honourable Lord Pentland, Chairman Caroline S Drummond David E L Johnston QC Professor Hector L MacQueen Dr Andrew J M Steven. The Chief Executive of the Commission is Malcolm McMillan. Its offices are at 140 Causewayside, Edinburgh EH9 1PR. Tel: 0131 668 2131 Email: [email protected] Or via our website at https://www.scotlawcom.gov.uk/contact-us/ NOTES 1. Please note that all hyperlinks in this document were checked for accuracy at the time of final draft. 2. If you have any difficulty in reading this document, please contact us and we will do our best to assist. You may wish to note that the pdf version of this document available on our website has been tagged for accessibility. 3. © Crown copyright 2018 You may re-use this publication (excluding logos and any photographs) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0. To view this licence visit http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3; or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 4DU; or email [email protected].
    [Show full text]
  • Japan Patent & Trademark Update
    TMI Associates Issue5 (November 2016) trademarks in Japan and in other countries, such as the fact Japan Patent & (1) Article 3-7 (2) of the Code of Civil of Procedure of Japan (Act of there being a considerable number of spectators at popular No. 109 of June 26, 1996, as amended) (the ”CCP”) as in effect world-wide events generally broadcasted and introduced today states that an agreement on the selection of international through television, magazines, and the Internet. jurisdiction “shall not become effective unless it is made with respect to an action based on certain legal relationships” and Trademark Update Next, the JPO Trial Board compared the trademark-in-question made in writing. and Red Bull’s trademarks and found both marks to share a common basic structure. Although the trademark-in-question (2) Since the MDSA was entered into in 2009, prior to the has larger horns which are colored in white, a larger head, amendments in 2011 to the CCP which introduced Article 3-7 and one forefoot, while Red Bull’s trademarks have two (2) (which became effective as of April 1, 2012) (the “2011 forefeet and comprise white lines to show the details of the Amendments”), it is not directly subject to the current Article body parts, the JPO Trial Board decided that (i) these 3-7 (2) in the CCP. differences did not surpass the basic structure that they have in common, and (ii) such differences do not have the (3) Thus, the validity of the relevant provision is to be examined impact of changing the visual impression we receive from under general principle (jori) by reference to the provisions of the overall structure of the two trademarks.
    [Show full text]