On 27^th January 2026, the Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the President of the EU Commission Ursula von der Leyen and the EU Council President António Costa announced in Delhi that they had agree on a free trade agreement between the EU and India. During the next years, Indian import duties on numerous European industrial products are to drop sharply. This concerns inter alia up to 250,000 cars per year, car parts, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, machinery and electrical appliances. The EU will abolish most of its import duties on Indian industrial products. European service providers shall be given easier access to the Indian market. Details will only be known during the next months, once, after legal review, the wording of the agreement will be fixed.

—

Your point of contact in India: Dr. Jörg Schendel

Suman Khaitan & Co.

W-13, West Wing, Greater Kailash Part-II
Delhi 110048, Indien

CELL:     +91 97 11 08 04 03
TEL:       +91 11 49 50 15 00
FAX:       +91 11 49 50 15 99

www.sumankhaitanco.in
germandesk@sumankhaitanco.in
schendel@adwa-law.com

Introduction – Relevance for German-Speaking Businesses

The AIAC Arbitration Rules 2026 entered into force on 1 January 2026 and apply to new arbitration proceedings registered with the Asian International Arbitration Centre (“AIAC”), the leading arbitral institution in Malaysia. This revised version marks not only a series of procedural amendments but a fundamental institutional realignment that is of immediate relevance, particularly for international investors and companies from Germany, Austria, and Switzerland.

For businesses from the German-speaking region that maintain subsidiaries, supply chains, or joint ventures in Asia, this means greater predictability, enhanced transparency, and improved alignment with international arbitration standards. The reform strengthens Malaysia’s position as an attractive international seat of arbitration, particularly for European economic actors with business relationships in Southeast Asia.

1. Institutional Restructuring: AIAC Court of Arbitration

One of the most significant changes is the introduction, for the first time, of a standalone Court of Arbitration (AIAC Court of Arbitration), including a President and a Registrar. This creates a clear separation between arbitral functions (such as appointment and removal of arbitrators, joinder and consolidation decisions, etc.) and administrative management—a model that is standard in many established institutions (e.g., the International Chamber of Commerce(ICC)).

For international parties, including those from Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, this reform means:

• Clearer decision-making pathways in procedural matters
• Greater institutional independence
• Enhanced credibility and predictability in complex cross-border disputes

2. Emergency and Interim Measures (Emergency Arbitration)

The 2026 Rules strengthen the emergency arbitrator procedure as an effective mechanism for obtaining urgent interim relief even before the constitution of the main tribunal.

Relevance for German-speaking companies:

• In cases involving asset dissipation, contractual breaches, or other urgent risks, swift action is possible—an essential advantage in international business relationships.
• Particularly relevant for subsidiaries in Malaysia that require rapid protective measures while decisions are coordinated from headquarters in Germany, Austria, or Switzerland.

3. Consolidation and Joinder – Greater Efficiency, Strategic Considerations

The new Rules provide a clear and structured framework for the consolidation of multiple arbitration proceedings and the joinder of additional parties. In particular:

• Consolidation may be ordered where disputes arise from the same or related transactions and the arbitration agreements are compatible.
• The Rules provide that, in the event of consolidation, the tribunal may be reconstituted, potentially resulting in parties waiving their right to nominate their own arbitrator.

For German, Austrian, and Swiss companies, this means:

• Arbitration agreements should be carefully drafted with respect to consolidation and tribunal composition.
• Strategic risks and benefits (efficiency versus “greater control” over tribunal appointment) must be considered already at the contract negotiation stage.

4. Summary Determination – Early Resolution of Disputes

The AIAC Rules 2026 introduce a structured summary determination procedure: a time-limited, expedited decision on manifestly unmeritorious claims or defenses, issued in the form of an arbitral award.

Benefits for parties from Germany, Austria, and Switzerland:

• Cost reduction by resolving clearly weak claims at an early stage.
• Increased procedural economy and legal certainty—an aspect frequently addressed in the internal compliance and litigation strategies of many European companies.

This innovation is particularly helpful because Malaysian companies, similar to practices in Malaysian court proceedings, have regularly resorted to tactical procedural delay. At least with regard to manifestly unmeritorious claims or defenses, this will no longer be possible in the future.

For the sake of completeness, it should be noted that the introduction of summary determination may also operate to the disadvantage of the party advancing a manifestly unmeritorious claim or defense. This need not necessarily be the Malaysian local contractual partner; it may equally be the company from Germany, Austria, or Switzerland.

5. Disclosure in Third-Party Funding

The 2026 Rules expressly incorporate disclosure obligations relating to third-party funding into the procedural framework (e.g., in the context of consolidation or joinder).

This aligns with international expectations regarding transparency and conflict avoidance and is particularly relevant for institutional investors or funded claimants from the German-speaking region.

6. Practical Recommendations for German-Speaking Companies

The following points should be considered in particular:

Contract Preparation and Drafting

• Review existing arbitration clauses, particularly those referring to earlier versions of the AIAC Rules.
• Consider drafting arbitration clauses that refer generally to the “Rules in force at the time of commencement of proceedings” to ensure flexibility for future updates.

Internal Compliance and Dispute Management

• Establish internal processes for emergency arbitration to enable swift action in urgent cases. This is especially important where a dispute already exists and escalation is imminent.
• Take into account the strategic implications of consolidation and joinder during contract negotiations—particularly in complex supply chains or project finance structures.

Coordination with European Legal Networks

• Close coordination between regional teams and headquarters is essential where multiple jurisdictions are involved.

Conclusion – Significance for the German-Speaking Market

The AIAC Arbitration Rules 2026 represent a significant modernization and bring the institution, both structurally and procedurally, in line with leading international arbitral institutions. Where Malaysian companies insist on an AIAC arbitration clause—which is regularly the case, particularly with state-linked enterprises—this development is highly relevant and welcome.

For companies from Germany, Austria, and Switzerland conducting business in Southeast Asia, the new Rules offer:

• Greater legal predictability
• Improved procedural efficiency
• Enhanced institutional transparency

This strengthens the attractiveness of AIAC arbitration as a strategic dispute resolution instrument for international investments and cross-border commercial relationships.

Further details can be found on the website of Aqran Vijandran.

—

Your point of contact in Malaysia: Dr. Harald Sippel

Aqran Vijandran

5-2A, Medan Klang Lama 28, 419, Jalan Klang Lama
Wilayah Persekutuan
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

TEL:      +60 1 8211 4958

www.aqranvijandran.com
sippel@adwa-law.com

Over the past few years, “China+1” and supply-chain diversification have moved from strategy decks into real capex decisions. In Southeast Asia, one of the most practical enablers of those decisions is not a single factory, port, or incentive—it’s the availability of “investment-ready” sites with predictable rules, governance, and operating infrastructure.

That’s why the reported push by Philippine Economic Zone Authority (PEZA) to secure approval for a new batch of economic zones deserves attention. Ecozone proclamations may sound procedural, but they are effectively the gating item that converts a land development concept into a regulated platform where exporters, IT-BPM firms, logistics providers, and manufacturers can actually locate, register, build, and operate at scale.

The context is compelling. PEZA’s own momentum going into 2026 has been framed as a “keep building” story: record investment approvals, an ambition to sustain that pace, and a clear policy signal that more locations—especially outside the usual clusters—are needed to stay competitive. In that sense, the ecozone pipeline is not just about the number of new sites, but about how quickly the Philippines can keep offering credible alternatives across different regions, talent pools, and infrastructure footprints.

It also matters because proclamations are where policy meets execution. The Office of the President issues proclamations designating specific sites as economic zones upon PEZA’s recommendation. That step is what allows developers to move from marketing a future zone to building a regulated ecosystem that can support locators with the documentation, compliance processes, and operational standards that multinational investors expect. When you see talk of “11 more” zones lined up for proclamation, you’re not seeing a headline about real estate—you’re seeing a signal about capacity expansion in the country’s investment platform.

For foreign investors (and their advisers), the practical takeaway is that “where” is becoming more flexible—but “how” remains just as important. The incentives landscape has evolved under CREATE and related implementing issuances. The upside is that the framework is clearer than during the early transition phase; the reality is that incentive eligibility and maintenance are operational disciplines, not a one-off registration checkbox. For example, for certain ecozone logistics models and supply-chain services, details like export thresholds and the treatment of VAT zero-rating on local purchases can materially change the economics of a project. These are exactly the kinds of issues that should be stress-tested early—before land is leased, equipment is ordered, and people are hired.

At the same time, investors should avoid treating “more ecozones” as automatically “more investable.” The winners—both for developers and locators—will be the zones that are genuinely execution-ready: power and water reliability, transport connectivity, local permitting coordination, resilience planning (weather, flooding, business continuity), and credible talent pipelines. Incentives can support competitiveness, but they cannot compensate for weak utilities, unclear land situations, or slow local execution.

From a regional-development perspective, the most interesting angle is that this pipeline is explicitly tied to spreading growth. If new proclamations continue to include sites outside the traditional magnets, that can unlock more distributed job creation and supplier formation—especially if zones are planned around real sector logic (electronics, shared services, agro-processing, green metals, logistics, and so on), rather than generic mixed-use branding.

My bottom line: the Philippines’ ecozone strategy is entering a phase where the constraint is less about “policy intent” and more about “delivery capacity.” If PEZA can keep converting the pipeline into proclaimed, investment-ready zones—while developers and LGUs execute the fundamentals—this becomes a durable advantage in the region’s competition for mobile capital.

If you’re evaluating a manufacturing, IT-BPM, or logistics footprint in the Philippines in 2026–2027, it’s a good moment to look beyond the headline count and ask the more decisive questions: which sites are proclamation-ready, which are operations-ready, and which legal/tax/compliance assumptions need to be validated before commitments become irreversible.

—

Your point of contact in the Philippines: Lutz Kaiser

Villanueva Gabionza & Dy Law Offices

20th/F Corporate Center
139 Valero St., Salcedo Village
Makati City 1227, Philippines

CELL: +63 995 985 4957
TEL: +63 2 8813 3351
FAX: +63 2 8816 6741

www.vgdlaw.ph
kaiser@adwa-law.com

With the Workplace Fairness Act, Singapore is introducing, for the first time, a comprehensive statutory anti-discrimination regime in employment law. The law is expected to enter into force at the end of 2027 and will bring new obligations for employers as well as a structured procedure for resolving discrimination disputes.

In our latest e-bulletin, we provide an overview of the key provisions of the Workplace Fairness Act and outline the steps employers should already be taking now.

E-bulletin: https://www.rflegal.com/upload/document/rf-legal-e-bulletin-28-sg-07.01.2026-de.pdf

This article is intended to provide a general overview and does not constitute legal advice. If you have any questions or require tailored legal advice, please contact the team at Respondek & Fan.

—

Your point of contact in Singapore: Dr. Andreas Respondek

Respondek & Fan Pte Ltd

1 North Bridge Road
#16-03 High Street Centre
Singapore 179094

CELL:      +65 9751 0757
TEL:        +65 6324 0060
FAX:       +65 6324 0223

www.rflegal.com
respondek@rflegal.com

Vietnam has significantly strengthened its personal data protection regime. With the Law on Personal Data Protection No. 91/2025/QH15 and its implementing Decree No. 356/2025/ND-CP, both effective from 1 January 2026, companies doing business in or with Vietnam face a more structured and enforceable compliance framework.

Who is covered?

The new rules apply broadly, including but not limited to:

• Vietnamese businesses;
• foreign businesses in Vietnam (FDIs); and
• foreign entities involved in the processing of personal data of Vietnamese citizens and persons of Vietnamese origin residing in Vietnam.

Relief for small businesses

Small businesses, startups, household businesses, and micro-enterprises may benefit from temporary exemptions or opt-out rights from certain obligations (such as Data Processing Impact Assessments and the appointment of a Data Protection Officer or Department) until 31 December 2030. However, such relief does not apply in a number of cases, e.g. where sensitive personal data is processed, including citizen identification card data.

Consent remains central

Consent continues to be the main legal basis for processing personal data and must be explicit and verifiable, specific as to purpose and data categories, and clearly inform data subjects of their rights.

Stronger data subject rights

The regulations introduce new timelines for responding to data subject requests, including access, correction, deletion, restriction, and objection. Companies must generally respond within two working days and complete actions within defined statutory periods.

Impact assessments become a core obligation

Companies processing personal data must prepare and maintain:

• a Data Processing Impact Assessment, and
• where data is transferred abroad, a Cross-Border Data Transfer Impact Assessment if no exemptions apply (e.g. HR data, cloud storage).

These assessments must be submitted to the Ministry of Public Security within statutory timelines and updated regularly when circumstances change.

Appointment of a Data Protection Officer / Department

Companies are required to designate a Personal Data Protection Officer or establish a Personal Data Protection Department. The responsible personnel must meet statutory qualification (at least a college degree) and experience requirements (e.g. legal, IT, HR) and are tasked with overseeing compliance, internal policies, and data protection measures.

Sanctions are substantial

Non-compliance can result in:

• suspension of data processing or transfers; and
• significant fines, including up to 5% of annual revenue for cross-border transfer violations.

Vietnam’s new framework is more detailed and closer to the GDPR and may help raise awareness of the importance of data protection in Vietnam. Considering the level of sanctions, this approach might have chances of success.

—

Your point of contact in Vietnam: Christian A. Brendel

Brendel & Associates Law Co., Ltd.

Golden Tower, 9th Floor, 6 Nguyen Thi Minh Khai
Dakao Ward, District 1
Ho-Chi-Minh-Stadt, Vietnam

CELL:     +84 98 978 4791
TEL:       +84 28 3911 2008
FAX:       +84 28 3911 2010

www.brendel-associates.com
info@brendel-associates.com