The Asia-Pacific region has become one of the most dynamic commercial zones globally but with rapid economic expansion comes legal complexity. In recent years, a notable surge in business and cross-border disputes has emerged, affecting industries from construction and infrastructure to technology and trade.

This article explores why these disputes are increasing, what types of conflicts are most common, and what practical steps businesses can take to mitigate legal risks across the region.

What’s Fueling the Rise in Business Disputes Across Asia-Pacific?

Several macroeconomic and regulatory developments are contributing to the uptick in disputes across APAC:

• Global supply chain disruptions, especially post-COVID and during geopolitical shifts
• Rising cross-border trade and investment, creating more contractual complexity
• Increased regulatory scrutiny, especially around data privacy, ESG, and anti-bribery compliance
• Digital transformation, leading to more IP, tech, and cybersecurity disputes
• Greater awareness of legal rights, especially by foreign investors and minority shareholders

Together, these forces are placing significant legal and financial pressure on companies operating across borders in Asia.

Top Legal Disputes Businesses Are Facing in the Region

As regional economies diversify and international investment flows increase, businesses across Asia-Pacific are encountering a growing volume and variety of legal disputes. These conflicts are no longer limited to isolated breaches—they are increasingly multifaceted, involving regulatory compliance, operational disruption, and strategic disagreements. Understanding the most prevalent types of disputes is essential for businesses to structure contracts more effectively and mitigate potential liabilities.

Among the most common are:

Construction and Infrastructure Disputes

These disputes frequently arise due to project delays, cost overruns, regulatory bottlenecks, or shifting government policies. Public-private partnerships (PPPs), transport megaprojects, and energy infrastructure developments are particularly vulnerable, often leading to breach-of-contract claims or disputes over scope and delivery terms.

Investment and Shareholder Disputes

As foreign direct investment in the region grows, disagreements over capital structure, governance, and shareholder rights are becoming more common. Common triggers include post-M&A disputes, joint venture deadlocks, and claims involving minority shareholders alleging oppression or mismanagement.

Contractual and Commercial Disputes

These disputes encompass a wide range of issues, including delayed payments, non-performance, wrongful termination, and force majeure claims. The most affected sectors include manufacturing, logistics, wholesale trade, and cross-border supply chain contracts.

Technology, Data, and Cybersecurity Claims

With the rapid digitalization of business in APAC, disputes involving software licensing, platform malfunctions, and data protection breaches have surged. Companies are increasingly facing claims related to cybersecurity lapses, contractual failures in IT projects, and cross-border data transfer violations.

ESG and Regulatory Violations

Legal exposure is rising for companies that fail to comply with environmental, social, and governance (ESG) obligations. Common disputes stem from labor law violations, environmental compliance failures, and anti-bribery enforcement. These issues not only lead to fines but can trigger shareholder suits and reputational harm.

Where Are Disputes Happening? Country-by-Country Trends

Some countries in Asia-Pacific are seeing faster growth in legal disputes than others:

• Vietnam: A growing hub for arbitration, with rising disputes in debt recovery, foreign investment, and shareholder conflicts. VIAC is gaining traction.
• Singapore: Regional leader in neutral arbitration; SIAC is a preferred venue for cross-border disputes, especially in finance and shipping.
• Hong Kong: Despite geopolitical shifts, HKIAC remains active in commercial arbitration, particularly involving Chinese counterparties.
• China: Increase in disputes involving state-owned enterprises, IP enforcement, and cross-border M&A.
• Indonesia and Thailand: Contract enforcement, regulatory delays, and investor-state disputes are common pain points.

Arbitration vs Litigation: Which Is Gaining Ground in Asia-Pacific?

Arbitration is becoming the preferred method of dispute resolution across much of Asia-Pacific due to its flexibility, confidentiality, and cross-border enforceability.

Key reasons arbitration is gaining ground:

• Enforceability under the New York Convention
• Ability to select neutral venues and experienced arbitrators
• Speed and procedural flexibility compared to national court systems

That said, litigation remains necessary in:

• Consumer protection cases
• Regulatory investigations
• Where arbitration clauses are absent

Choosing the right dispute resolution clause in your contract preferably arbitration with a regional center like SIAC, HKIAC, or VIAC is now a standard best practice.

How Can Companies Protect Themselves Against Rising Legal Risks?

Legal disputes can be costly and reputationally damaging. Companies operating across APAC should adopt the following preventive strategies:

• Draft precise contracts with clear dispute resolution mechanisms (arbitration, jurisdiction, governing law)
• Assess jurisdictional risk when entering high-value or long-term agreements
• Use arbitration clauses for contracts involving cross-border services, trade, or investment
• Conduct compliance audits to identify risks in ESG, data handling, and labor standards
• Engage local legal counsel early to identify jurisdiction-specific pitfalls and remedies

Risk prevention and fast dispute readiness are now core elements of doing business in the Asia-Pacific region.

Proactive Legal Strategy Is Your Best Defense

The rise in disputes across Asia-Pacific is not a short-term trend, it reflects a structural shift in the region’s commercial and regulatory environment. Businesses must be proactive, not reactive, in planning for disputes.

By understanding where and why disputes are occurring, and by embedding strong legal infrastructure into your commercial strategy, you can minimize risks and strengthen your position should conflict arise.