Bangkok, August 25, 2014 ? The ASEAN Capital Markets Forum ("ACMF") announced today that the ASEAN CIS Framework for cross-border offering of collective investment schemes ("CIS") is now operational in Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand ("member jurisdictions"). This announcement follows the signing of the Memorandum of Understanding for the ASEAN CIS Framework by the Securities Commission of Malaysia, the Monetary Authority of Singapore and the Securities and Exchange Commission, Thailand in Oc...
Bangkok, September 28, 2015 ? The SEC approved the Mizuho Bank, Ltd. offering of THB 3 billion baht-denominated bond, the first issue under the ASEAN +3 Multi-Currency Bond Issuance Framework (AMBIF) cooperation.AMBIF, an initiative of ASEAN Bond Market Forum (ABMF), aims to boost product quantity and variety and the growth of bond market in ASEAN + 3 in response to demand of fundraisers and investors in the region. Bond issuers will be enabled to raise funds through multi-jurisdictional offeri...
newly-launched coffee stands has greatly benefited from the changing Positive signal from Mikka Coffee Stand during COVID prompted further outlet expansion behavior, and the sales of take-away coffee
the new Khiang brand which was launched at the end of 2018. Furthermore, 2 new brands were opened at the end of 2019 to further enhance the variety of restaurants in the Group, these being Foo Flavor
Company Limited (UMI) shares by allowing the accounts for securities trading and bank deposit to be opened in his name and facilitating relevant financial transactions. The court of first instance dismissed
Company Limited (UMI) shares by allowing the accounts for securities trading and bank deposit to be opened in his name and facilitating relevant financial transactions. The court of first instance disposed
monitoring and coordinating with the business operators, we have found that they have implemented their BCP to manage possible impacts of COVID-19 and opened an alternative site or installed remote working
opened in his name and facilitating relevant financial transactions. His action was considered a contravention of Section 243(1) in conjunction with Section 244 and 243(2) of the Securties and Exchange Act