Showing 61 - 70 of 1289 for "" with applied filters
03 February 2026 by
Summary: The Supreme Court in Novenco v. Xero (2025) held that continuing IP infringement constitutes inherent urgency, effectively rewriting the mandatory pre-litigation requirements under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act.
22 January 2026 by
asialaw's Deal of the Month for January 2026 is...
22 January 2026 by
We are pleased to announce the expansion of our United Square office and the corresponding closure of our Bank of China branch.
22 January 2026 by
n the creative industry, names are often born from spontaneity, innovation, and originality. However, few recognize that a popular name without legal protection represents a missed opportunity. The success of Agak Laen: Menyala Pantiku! illustrates that a name is not merely a film title, it is a legal and economic asset when protected as a registered trademark.
22 January 2026 by
Our chapter highlights Malaysia’s major energy transition shifts
22 January 2026 by
asialaw's Lawyer of the Month for January 2026 is...
22 January 2026 by
Undertaking by a promoter to infuse funds into a borrower company, cannot be treated as a contract of guarantee and thus does not amount to financial debt under the IBC.
19 December 2025 by
On July 10, 2024, the Daegu High Court, Civil Division 2 (Presiding Judge, Tae-hyun Kim) rendered a judgment denying the establishment of a worker dispatch relationship between Public Institution A and the plaintiffs, who were workers of a subcontractor entrusted with performing facility maintenance work for Public Institution A (Daegu High Court Decision 2021Na21952, 21969 (consolidated) and 2021Na21976, all rendered on July 10, 2025).
19 December 2025 by
Kim & Chang’s Intellectual Property Practice successfully represented Pharmbio Korea Inc. (“Pharmbio Korea”), a domestic pharmaceutical company, in two patent invalidation lawsuits related to bowel cleanser tablets. The team secured victories at both the Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board (the “IPTAB”) and the Intellectual Property High Court (the “IP High Court”) by demonstrating that the two patents in question (the “Subject Patents”) could not have been easily developed by a person of ordinary skill in the art based on the prior art inventions.
19 December 2025 by
Kim & Chang secured a complete victory for a leading Korean mobility platform company (the “Plaintiff”) in a lawsuit against the Korea Fair Trade Commission (the “KFTC”). The lawsuit sought to revoke the KFTC’s corrective order and a fine of approximately KRW 27.1 billion. The KFTC had argued that the Plaintiff abused its market dominance by using an algorithm to unfairly favor its member taxis. The Seoul High Court accepted our arguments and overturned the KFTC’s dispositions entirely.
