D&P Law Group

12/09/2025

𝗗𝗶𝘀𝗰𝘂𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗡𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗹𝗲 𝗤𝗥 𝗖𝗼𝗱𝗲 𝗟𝗮𝘄𝘀𝘂𝗶𝘁: 𝗜𝗣 𝗟𝗮𝘄 ⚖️

The Kuala Lumpur High Court held that QR codes, whether static or dynamic, cannot attract intellectual property protection as such. QR codes were invented by Denso Wave in the 1990s and released for public use without patent or copyright protection.

Accordingly, no party can claim exclusive rights over the QR code format itself. Mad Labs’ claim of proprietorship over the QR Code per se was dismissed. However, the Court distinguished between the QR Code as a tool and the supporting infrastructure. Mad Labs had developed and operated the redirection and tracking system underlying the Trial QR Code.

The Court made the following orders:

• Declaration that QR codes belong to the public domain.

• Finding that Mad Labs had no proprietary rights in the QR Code itself, but retained rights in the supporting system.

• Declaration that Nestlé had wrongfully used the Trial QR Code beyond the trial period.

• Permanent injunction restraining Nestlé from further unauthorised use of the Trial QR Code.

• Compensation payable by Nestlé to Mad Labs for unauthorised use, with quantum to be determined in separate assessment proceedings.

• Dismissal of Mad Labs’ claim for RM139 million, dismissal of unjust enrichment claim in the pleaded form, and dismissal of Nestlé’s claims for defamation, trade libel, and unlawful interference.

𝗜𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗝𝘂𝗱𝗴𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁

1. 𝗣𝘂𝗯𝗹𝗶𝗰 𝗗𝗼𝗺𝗮𝗶𝗻: QR codes, like barcodes, are functional tools that remain in the public domain.

2. 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗽𝗿𝗶𝗲𝘁𝗮𝗿𝘆 𝗦𝘆𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗺𝘀: Ancillary systems built around generic tools may constitute protectable assets. In this case, Mad Labs’ redirection and analytic infrastructure was proprietary and subject to legal protection.

3. 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗮𝗹 𝗖𝗹𝗮𝗿𝗶𝘁𝘆: Trial arrangements must be carefully documented, with clear provisions on duration, post-trial usage, renewal, and cessation. The absence of such clarity exposes parties to disputes.

4. 𝗡𝗲𝗴𝗹𝗶𝗴𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗢𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁: Companies must ensure proper oversight of packaging and marketing materials to avoid unauthorised use of third-party systems.

5. 𝗗𝗮𝗺𝗮𝗴𝗲𝘀: The case shows that exaggerated or speculative claims, such as royalty-by-print calculations, are unlikely to succeed without concrete evidence. Courts will focus instead on actual loss and fair compensation.

𝗖𝗼𝗻𝗰𝗹𝘂𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻

The High Court drew a clear distinction between what lies in the public domain and what may be protected as proprietary. While QR codes themselves cannot be owned, the systems enabling their commercial use may attract protection.

The decision underscores the importance of contractual precision in technology collaborations and highlights the limits of intellectual property protection where public-domain tools are involved.

Ref: https://tinyurl.com/4kyn9e2j

10/09/2025

𝗠𝗮𝗹𝗮𝘆𝘀𝗶𝗮’𝘀 𝗡𝗲𝘄 𝗗𝗮𝘁𝗮 𝗟𝗮𝘄 💾⚖️

On 28 April 2025, Malaysia’s Data Sharing Act 2025 (Act 864) came into force, marking a major step in the nation’s data governance evolution. Enacted on 5 February and gazetted on 20 February 2025, this law creates a structured legal framework for data exchange between public sector agencies.

𝗞𝗲𝘆 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝘃𝗶𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗗𝗮𝘁𝗮 𝗦𝗵𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗔𝗰𝘁 𝟮𝟬𝟮𝟱

• Section 5 DSA 2025 establishes the National Data Sharing Committee (NDSC).

• Appoints the Director General of the National Digital Department (DG-NDD) as the approving authority for all public sector data exchanges.

• Centralised oversight aims to speed up approvals, ensure compliance with public interest, national security, and privacy safeguards.

𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗰𝗲𝗱𝘂𝗿𝗲𝘀 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗗𝗮𝘁𝗮 𝗦𝗵𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 (𝗦𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝟭𝟮 𝗗𝗦𝗔 𝟮𝟬𝟮𝟱)

• Public agencies must submit written requests to the DG-NDD specifying: categories and scope of data, purpose and necessity, identity of provider and recipient, and security, storage, and disposal measures.

𝗔𝗽𝗽𝗿𝗼𝘃𝗮𝗹 𝗖𝗿𝗶𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗮 (𝗦𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝟭𝟰(𝟭) 𝗗𝗦𝗔 𝟮𝟬𝟮𝟱)

• Requests reviewed within 14 days to ensure they serve public interest, comply with safeguards, and meet national security requirements.

• DG-NDD may consult the NDSC.

• Approvals may include conditions such as limiting data scope or imposing stricter protection protocols.

𝗕𝗲𝗻𝗲𝗳𝗶𝘁𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗗𝗮𝘁𝗮 𝗦𝗵𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗔𝗰𝘁 𝟮𝟬𝟮𝟱

• Streamlines collaboration between agencies.

• Embeds legal safeguards to protect sensitive information.

• Empowers agencies to refuse requests that endanger security, violate confidentiality, or risk individual safety.

• Promotes data sharing while upholding legality, privacy, and protection.

𝗣𝗲𝗻𝗮𝗹𝘁𝗶𝗲𝘀 𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿 𝗦𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝟮𝟱 𝗗𝗦𝗔 𝟮𝟬𝟮𝟱

• Fine: up to RM1,000,000 for breach of Act or approval conditions.

• Imprisonment: up to 5 years for serious or deliberate violations.

• Both: RM1,000,000 and 5 years for severe or repeated breaches, such as compromising national security.

𝗪𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗿 𝗜𝗺𝗽𝗮𝗰𝘁

Public agencies are now legally bound to formalise data-sharing processes with approvals channelled through the NDSC. Private contractors, service providers, NGOs, and research institutions handling government-linked data may also need to:

• Amend contracts to ensure compliance.

• Strengthen cybersecurity in line with upcoming Security Standards Regulations.

• Maintain audit trails to demonstrate compliance.

The Act marks a decisive shift towards structured, secure data governance. Yet it also highlights the tension between transparency and individual privacy. At D&P Law Group, we provide legal insight and practical solutions to help organisations remain compliant, efficient, and ahead of the curve.

𝗥𝗲𝗳: https://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2025/02/18/govt-agencies-allowed-to-share-data-from-feb-20-says-digital-minister

05/09/2025

𝗕𝗹𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗲𝗱 𝗠𝗮𝘂𝗹𝗶𝗱𝘂𝗿 𝗥𝗮𝘀𝘂𝗹

On the occasion of Maulidur Rasul, we take a moment to acknowledge the significance of this day and its message of compassion and integrity.

D&P extends sincere wishes to you and your family for a thoughtful and peaceful observance 🕊

04/09/2025

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗚𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗻𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗰𝘂𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗕𝗶𝗹𝗹 – 𝗔 𝗧𝗿𝘂𝗲 𝗦𝘁𝗲𝗽 𝗧𝗼𝘄𝗮𝗿𝗱𝘀 𝗧𝗿𝗮𝗻𝘀𝗽𝗮𝗿𝗲𝗻𝗰𝘆 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗔𝗰𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗻𝘁𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆? 🏛📜

𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗶𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗚𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗻𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗰𝘂𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗕𝗶𝗹𝗹:

Malaysia’s Government Procurement Bill 2025 aims to govern all duties, powers and procedures of procurement carried out by ministries, agencies and local authorities allocated with public funding.

𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗞𝗲𝘆 𝗙𝗲𝗮𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲𝘀:

Some key measures introduced by the Bill to strengthen the integrity of the government procurement process includes:

• 𝘀. 𝟮𝟴 – mandates that open and fair competition will as the primary method;

• 𝘀. 𝟯𝟱 – prohibits any transfer, assignment or novation of a grant/contract without prior approval;

• 𝘀. 𝟯𝟳 – mandates duty to disclose where there may be conflict-of-interest;

• 𝘀. 𝟯𝟴 – prohibits interference, intervention and/or undue influence;

• 𝘀𝘀. 𝟲𝟮 𝘁𝗼 𝟴𝟭 – establishes the composition and powers of the Government Procurement Appeal Tribunal;

• 𝘀𝘀. 𝟴𝟮 𝘁𝗼 𝟴𝟴 – implements statutory offences for non-compliance with the Bill.

𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗖𝗿𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗶𝘀𝗺𝘀 𝗦𝗼 𝗙𝗮𝗿:

Despite the above safeguards, the Bill has received significant criticisms from civil society organisations such as C4 Centre and think-tanks such as IDEAS for the following:

• The Bill provides for extensive ministerial discretion in areas such as determining regulations for procurement approvals and approving contracts with no upper limit of contract value;

• The Bill lacks mandatory public facing mechanisms, such as publication of procurement information to allow for scrutiny and review;

• s. 35 allows for transfer, assignment or novation of a contract with the approval of just one controlling officer, which is not sufficient to prevent rampant sub-contracting;

• The Bill’s entire life cycle, from ‘white paper’ to its passing in Dewan Rakyat, was rushed through within the span of only 16 days.

𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗡𝗲𝘅𝘁 𝗦𝘁𝗲𝗽𝘀:

On 28 August 2025, the Bill was passed in the Dewan Rakyat, and it will next be considered by the Dewan Negara before being gazetted.

The Bill has been enacted to address long-standing concerns about rampant sub-contracting, unregulated leakages of public funds, lack of transparency and corruption of the tendering process and awarding of contracts. As such, improvements such as further review by civil society organisation and adoption of international procurement standards must be made to reflect genuine commitment to transparency and accountability.

27/08/2025

𝗦𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗵 𝘃 𝗦𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗵: 𝗨𝗞 𝗦𝘂𝗽𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗲 𝗖𝗼𝘂𝗿𝘁 𝗖𝗹𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗳𝗶𝗲𝘀 𝗦𝗰𝗼𝗽𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝗠𝗮𝘁𝗿𝗶𝗺𝗼𝗻𝗶𝗮𝗹 𝗔𝘀𝘀𝗲𝘁𝘀⚖️🇬🇧
The UK Supreme Court in its recent case of Standish v Standish [2025] UKSC 26 has established a defining principle in UK divorce and family law: that the “sharing principle” applies to matrimonial assets only, delineating it from non-matrimonial assets and refining the scope of ancillary relief.

𝗙𝗮𝗰𝘁𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗰𝗮𝘀𝗲
A husband and wife suffered a breakdown of their marriage in 2020. Prior to the divorce in 2017, the husband, a former UBS executive with significant pre-marital wealth, transferred assets worth approximately £80 million into his wife’s sole name as part of an inheritance tax planning exercise. The £80 million in assets comprised of both the husband’s pre-marital wealth and income generated after the marriage.

The expectation was that these assets would be settled into trusts for their children. However, the trusts were never created, and the wife retained the assets in her name when the marriage ended in 2020.

𝗦𝘂𝗺𝗺𝗮𝗿𝘆 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗝𝘂𝗱𝗴𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁
The question for the Supreme Court was this: was the £80 million in assets, transferred from the husband to the wife only three years before the divorce, subject to the sharing principle?

𝗜𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗝𝘂𝗱𝗴𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁
In its unanimous judgment, the Supreme Court held that the sharing principle is applicable to matrimonial assets only. This means that assets generated throughout and as a result of the marriage are subject to equal sharing between parties, but non-matrimonial assets, such as pre-marital assets or assets from an external source (inheritance), is not subject to such division.

The wife attempted to argue that the £80 million in assets had completely converted into matrimonial assets when the husband transferred them into her name. However, the Court dismissed this argument and instead held that “matrimonialisation” occurs only where parties treat non-matrimonial property as shared over time, for instance by integrating it into family finances or using it to purchase the matrimonial home.

Therefore, as the £80 million in assets comprised of both matrimonial and non-matrimonial assets, the Supreme Court upheld that only the matrimonial portion (estimated at 25%) was subject to the sharing principle.

𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗺𝗲𝗮𝗻 𝗺𝗼𝘃𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗳𝗼𝗿𝘄𝗮𝗿𝗱?
The Supreme Court has now expressly excluded non-matrimonial property from the sharing principle, bringing greater clarity and predictability to financial remedy in divorce proceedings. Moving forward, practitioners must advise clients that equal division is confined to matrimonial assets only. Any arguments for matrimonialisation will require compelling evidence to show that the parties have, over time, treated the relevant asset as part of their marriage.

𝗥𝗲𝗳: https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/judgments/uksc-2024-0089

25/08/2025

𝗗𝗶𝗴𝗶𝘁𝗮𝗹 𝗜𝗻𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗶𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗶𝗻 𝗠𝗮𝗹𝗮𝘆𝘀𝗶𝗮 🗂️ 🔑

What happens to our accounts (social media, digital assets) after death?

In Malaysia the law hasn’t quite caught up. Digital assets sit in a grey area between platform terms and traditional wills.

Our latest Legal Bites breaks down what counts as a digital asset and the practical steps to take now: appoint a digital executor, create a secure inventory, and indicate your wishes in your will.

21/08/2025

𝗧𝗮𝘅 𝗜𝗻𝗰𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲𝘀: 𝗚𝗿𝗲𝗲𝗻 𝗜𝗻𝘃𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗧𝗮𝘅 𝗔𝗹𝗹𝗼𝘄𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲 (𝗚𝗜𝗧𝗔) & 𝗚𝗿𝗲𝗲𝗻 𝗜𝗻𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗲 𝗧𝗮𝘅 𝗘𝘅𝗲𝗺𝗽𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 (𝗚𝗜𝗧𝗘) 🌳💰

Malaysia has introduced two tax incentives to accelerate sustainable technology adoption: the Green Investment Tax Allowance (𝗚𝗜𝗧𝗔) and the Green Income Tax Exemption (𝗚𝗜𝗧𝗘). Available from 1 January 2024 to 31 December 2026, they reduce tax liabilities while promoting sustainability, energy efficiency, and long-term cost savings.

Authorities involved

• Malaysian Green Technology and Climate Change Corporation (𝗠𝗚𝗧𝗖): verifies qualifying assets and services under the MYHIJAU Programme.

• Malaysian Investment Development Authority (𝗠𝗜𝗗𝗔): evaluates applications before referral to the National Committee on Investment (𝗡𝗖𝗜).

📌𝗚𝗜𝗧𝗔

Two main categories apply:

𝗕𝘂𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗷𝗲𝗰𝘁𝘀: large-scale green initiatives such as hydrogen production, waste management, EV charging infrastructure, biomass/biogas plants, mini-hydro and geothermal stations, and solar or wind projects. These can secure a 100% tax allowance, offset against either 100% or 70% of statutory income depending on tier. Relief may extend up to 10 years (five years plus five-year extension for hydrogen, five years for other projects).

𝗢𝘄𝗻 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘀𝘂𝗺𝗽𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗔𝘀𝘀𝗲𝘁𝘀: infrastructure and technologies for internal use, including battery storage, green-certified buildings, renewable energy installations, and energy efficiency systems. Approval by the Finance Minister and MGTC verification are required. Assets qualify for 100% or 60% allowance, offset against 70% of statutory income depending on tier.

📌𝗚𝗜𝗧𝗘

This incentive targets solar leasing projects verified by the Sustainable Energy Development Authority (𝗦𝗘𝗗𝗔).

• Installations 3–10 MW: 70% income tax exemption for five years.

• Installations 10–30 MW: 70% exemption for ten years.

𝗖𝗼𝗻𝗰𝗹𝘂𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻

By routing applications through MIDA and requiring MGTC verification, Malaysia ensures a structured and credible pathway for businesses to benefit from these schemes. Together, GITA and GITE support the national agenda for renewable energy, low-carbon technologies, and sustainable infrastructure, helping pave the way toward a resource-efficient, low-carbon economy.

𝗥𝗲𝗳:https://www.mgtc.gov.my/storage/2022/07/REC-GTGT-007-GUIDELINES-FOR-GREEN-TECHNOLOGY-TAX-INCENTIVE-GITAGITE.pdf

14/08/2025

𝗧𝗲𝗻𝗴𝗸𝘂 𝗠𝗮𝗶𝗺𝘂𝗻 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗣𝗮𝘁𝗵 𝘁𝗼 𝗠𝗮𝗹𝗮𝘆𝘀𝗶𝗮’𝘀 𝗔𝗽𝗲𝘅 𝗖𝗼𝘂𝗿𝘁 ⚖📘

As Malaysia bids farewell to Chief Justice Tengku Maimun, her retirement invites reflection not only on her landmark decisions but also on the appointment process that placed her at the helm.

This article takes a closer look at the Judicial Appointments Commission’s role, the constitutional safeguards in place, and how Tengku Maimun’s tenure exemplified the impact of principled selection.

🔍 Explore her most notable cases, the judicial appointment process, and what it means for the future of judicial independence with our latest article.

Appointment Procedure for the Chief Justice The appointment of the Chief Justice of Malaysia is governed by two statutes: Article 122B of the Federal Constitution, and the Judicial Appointments Commission Act 2009 (“JACA 2009”). The standard procedure for appointment for appointment of a Chief J...

12/08/2025

𝗖𝗮𝗻 𝗮 𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁𝘀𝗔𝗽𝗽 𝗺𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 𝗰𝗼𝘀𝘁 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗷𝗼𝗯? 📲

In Malaysia, the answer is increasingly yes.

As WhatsApp becomes a formal tool for workplace communication, courts are treating misconduct on chat apps with the same seriousness as in-office behaviour. Whether it is an offensive remark or a quiet exit from an official group chat, the consequences can be significant.

💼 Want to understand the legal boundaries and safeguard your role or organisation?

Explore our latest Legal Bites for clear, practical guidance on navigating this evolving digital terrain.

08/08/2025

🎭 𝗙𝗮𝗰𝗲 𝗩𝗮𝗹𝘂𝗲: 𝗗𝗲𝗻𝗺𝗮𝗿𝗸’𝘀 𝗕𝗼𝗹𝗱 𝗠𝗼𝘃𝗲 𝗼𝗻 𝗔𝗜 & 𝗕𝗶𝗼𝗺𝗲𝘁𝗿𝗶𝗰 𝗥𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁𝘀 🛡
Denmark’s proposed bill grants individuals the right to remove AI-generated content featuring their face, voice, or body regardless of intent. A powerful precedent, but with notable gaps: no enforcement body, only initiated by individuals themselves.

Meanwhile, the US 🇺🇸, EU 🇪🇺, and France 🇫🇷 are tightening criminal laws on deepfakes. Malaysia, by contrast, has yet to catch up with AI-specific safeguards.

🔍 Dive into our latest Legal Bites to unpack the key highlights of this proposed bill and similar legislations around the world.

29/07/2025

𝗔 𝗧𝗮𝘅 𝗼𝗻 𝗦𝘂𝗻𝗹𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁: 𝗧𝗿𝘂𝗺𝗽'𝘀 𝗧𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗳𝗳𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗜𝗺𝗽𝗮𝗰𝘁 𝗼𝗻 𝗔𝘀𝗶𝗮'𝘀 𝗦𝗼𝗹𝗮𝗿 𝗜𝗻𝗱𝘂𝘀𝘁𝗿𝘆 ⚡🌤️

As of April 2025, the US administration under President Trump has levied widespread tariffs across multiple industries and market sectors, causing confusion and uncertainty amongst international suppliers and manufacturers (said tariffs were also ratified by the US Commerce Department in June 2025).

Major Asian exporters of solar panels and photovoltaic cells to the US which were not included in the initial levied tariffs:

• 𝗜𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗮: as of 2024, 97.5% of the solar cell exports from India were made to the US.3

• 𝗜𝗻𝗱𝗼𝗻𝗲𝘀𝗶𝗮: as of 2024, Indonesia’s solar cell exports to the US were valued at USD246 million.

Solar cell export rates from Indonesia and Cambodia have surged by around 1700%, following the initial round of tariffs in November 20245. However, it remains to be seen if further tariffs may be imposed on these countries later this year. Given the reliance on exports to the US in each of these countries’ solar industries, the imposition of tariffs may have significant consequences.

Chinese solar manufacturers initially migrated to South-East Asia after anti-dumping tariffs were imposed on direct exports from China by the European Commission in 2013. In light of the US tariffs and rising operating costs, Chinese manufacturers are now beginning to abandon their ASEAN operations. Workers throughout SEA employed by Chinese solar companies may face threatening job security following this shift. In addition, more than 5,000 workers in the Malaysian solar industry are at risk as their employers contemplate relocation.

However, Chinese commentators have been more skeptical that these tariffs will have a long-lasting impact. Major Chinese industry players such as Trina Solar and Jinko Solar anticipate that they will be able to retain a competitive edge by continuing operations in regions outside of the current tariffs. Alternatively, manufacturers may implement protective clauses in export contracts to offset potential losses. It is interesting that listed solar industry players have seen little to no reduction in earnings at the time of writing.

Despite these challenges, solar imports and exports within Asia have yet to see major turbulence following the imposition of the tariffs. The clean energy sector in Asia is also seeing an increase in ventures into hydropower generation, as an alternative to solar energy. In our continued efforts to support renewable energy suppliers and manufacturers in ASEAN, we will continue to provide updates as the industry adapts.

𝗥𝗲𝗳: https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2025/6/11/as-trumps-tariffs-loom-southeast-asias-solar-industry-faces-devastation

24/07/2025

𝗠𝗮𝗻𝗱𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘆 𝗔𝗽𝗽𝗼𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗼𝗳 𝗗𝗮𝘁𝗮 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝘁𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗢𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗶𝗻 𝗠𝗮𝗹𝗮𝘆𝘀𝗶𝗮 🛡🖥

Under the newly issued DPO Guideline 2025, Malaysian organisations are now legally required to appoint a Data Protection Officer (“DPO”) if they:
• 📊 process over 20,000 personal data subjects, or
• 🔐 process over 10,000 sensitive personal data subjects.

Whether internal or outsourced, your DPO must demonstrate robust legal ⚖️, technical 🧠, and ethical 🤝 expertise to embed PDPA compliance throughout your operations.

This shift marks a strategic evolution, moving beyond compliance into proactive data stewardship.

🔍 Read our latest Legal Bites for a practical guide on navigating the thresholds and optimising your data governance framework.