The Ministry of Health issued Circular 26/2020/TT-BYT (“Circular 26”) dated 28 December 2020 to amend and supplement Circular 22/2013/TT-BYT dated 9 August 2013 (“Circular 22”) regarding continuous medical education (CME) for medical officials.
Circular 26 came into effect on 1 March 2021.
On 26 February 2021, the Singapore Ministry of Health (MOH) announced that it is introducing a new voluntary listing of direct telemedicine service providers, to assist patients with making informed choices when selecting telemedicine service providers. According to the MOH, this scheme will be an interim measure to promote patient safety and welfare in the provision of telemedicine services, pending the upcoming regulation of telemedicine services under the new soon-to-be-implemented Healthcare Services Act.
Hong Kong continues to have an active and growing money-lending market. Since 2016, the Hong Kong Government has adopted a four-pronged approach to enhancing the compliance standards of non-bank money lenders. The Hong Kong Companies Registry (CR), which currently performs the role of Registrar of Money Lenders (“Registrar”) pursuant to the Money Lenders Ordinance (MLO),1Â recently released a new Guideline on Fit and Proper Criteria for Licensing of Money Lenders2Â (“Fit and Proper Guideline”) and a Guideline on Submission of Business Plan by Applicant of a Money Lenders Licence3Â (“Business Plan Guideline”). The new guidelines (“Guidelines”) will be effective from 1 April 2021. In this publication, we provide an overview of the money lenders regime in Hong Kong and the implications of the new Guidelines on new and existing market participants.Â
In his recent 2021-22 Budget Speech,1Â the Financial Secretary (“Financial Secretary”) of the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (“Hong Kong Government”) confirmed the intended timing for submission of a legislative proposal to allow foreign investment funds to re-domicile to Hong Kong for registration as an Open-ended Fund Company (OFC). The Financial Secretary also announced subsidies for the costs of setting up a new OFC or re-domiciling of foreign investment funds registering as an OFC in Hong Kong. The latest measures represent further important steps in ongoing enhancements and incentives to promote use of the OFC regime. We discuss the recent developments in more depth below.
On 22 February 2021, the Ministry of Industry and Trade of Vietnam (MOIT) released the draft proposal for the national power development plan for the period of 2021-2030, with a vision to 2045 (âDraft PDP8â) for public comments. This is the third version of the draft, which the MOIT prepared and updated in February 2021. The draft proposal includes an 843-page main explanatory report, with an addition of 174 pages of appendices.
Under the Master Planning Law and the notice from the MOIT, the draft proposal of PDP8 has been made available for public comments for a period of 30 days from the MOIT’s notice.
We set out below the key highlights of the draft PDP8 proposal.
On 19 February 2021, the majority of the Malaysian Federal Court (“Federal Court”) delivered its much-anticipated judgment in Peguam Negara Malaysia v Mkini Dotcom Sdn Bhd and Another [2020] 4 MLJ 791 in respect of the allegation of contempt of court by way of comments posted by subscribers and readers on the Malaysiakini news portal on 9 June 2020.
The Federal Court in its majority decision held that Malaysiakini, an online platform provider, is liable  for third party comments which are offensive and inappropriate even though they had no knowledge of the same until notified and where the impugned comments were then promptly removed. Further, compliance with the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Content Code (“Content Code”) did not shield Malaysiakini from liability.Â
While the matter related to an offence of criminal contempt, the Federal Court’s decision is likely to impact and change the landscape of liability for online platform providers in Malaysia with regard to third party content.Â
States around the world have adopted measures in reaction to the unprecedented nature and scale of the COVID-19 pandemic to curb the spread of the virus, ensure healthcare systems are not overrun and, more recently, balance reviving the economy and keeping control of the virus. These wide-ranging and far-reaching measures are not without consequences, particularly on foreign investments.Â
We highlight examples of measures that may have the potential â and for some have already started â to give rise to claims under investment treaties.
Yesterday, the Chairman of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), Rod Sims, announced the ACCC’s compliance and enforcement priorities for 2021 and the market studies and advocacy work that the ACCC would continue this year.
Mr Sims identified a range of industry sectors, as well as specific competition and consumer law issues that will be the focus of the ACCC’s compliance and enforcement activities for 2021.
The Vietnamese government recently issued Decree No. 05/2021/ND-CP (“Decree No. 05”)1Â on the management and operation of airports and airfields in Vietnam, replacing Decree No. 102/2015/ND-CP (“Decree No. 102”).2Â The new decree comes into effect on 10 March 2021, and provides for, among other things, new regulations regarding the investment and operation of airport and airfield projects in Vietnam.
In the context of the global shift from government ownership and operation to private participation in the airport and aviation infrastructure sector, and responding to increasing calls to promote private sector investments in airports in Vietnam, Decree No. 05 provides certain foundations to facilitate new opportunities for private investment in airports and airfields in Vietnam.
However, there are certain legal issues that will need to be considered in relation to airport concessions, depending on whether the legal and contractual frameworks involve public-private partnership (PPP) or private investment structures on a project-by-project basis.
The Japanese value added tax is referred to as JCT. As all taxes around the world have connections with the history of the tax mechanism of each country, the explanation below also covers the history of the discussions regarding introducing value added tax in Japan.